+1
Checked the changes since rc4  in git.
verified signature, checksums. build against hadoop2, ran simple queries.


On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 8:11 PM, Gunther Hagleitner
<ghagleit...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> One more time, with feeling :-)
>
> +1, same verification as last time.
> ________________________________________
> From: Vikram Dixit K <vikram.di...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 6:51 PM
> To: dev@hive.apache.org
> Cc: <hive-...@hadoop.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Hive 1.2.0 release candidate 5
>
> I built against hadoop1 and hadoop2 and ran the rat tool as well. Ran
> a couple of queries.
>
> +1
>
> Thanks
> Vikram.
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Sushanth Sowmyan <khorg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> We've cleared all the blockers listed for 1.2.0 release, either
>> committing them, or deferring out to an eventual 1.2.1 stabilization
>> release. (Any deferrals were a result of discussion between myself and
>> the committer responsible for the issue.) More details are available
>> here : 
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/Hive+1.2+Release+Status
>>
>> Apache Hive 1.2.0 Release Candidate 5 is available here:
>>
>> https://people.apache.org/~khorgath/releases/1.2.0_RC5/artifacts/
>>
>> My public key used for signing is as available from the hive
>> committers key list : http://www.apache.org/dist/hive/KEYS
>>
>> Maven artifacts are available here:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehive-1039
>>
>> Source tag for RC5 is up on the apache git repo as tag
>> "release-1.2.0-rc5" (Browseable view over at
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=hive.git;a=tag;h=76b90268084f529852396302884297b3c22fcf00
>> )
>>
>> Since this has minimal changes from the previous RC, I would further
>> request that this vote conclude in 20 hours(which is past the 72 hr
>> time from the previous RC announcement) if we have enough +1s in the
>> meanwhile.
>>
>> Hive PMC Members: Please test and vote.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Sushanth
>
>
>
> --
> Nothing better than when appreciated for hard work.
> -Mark

Reply via email to