I wouldn't worry about it. Ship the thing. I had trouble making it pass all tests on mac. Will did in in time for next release.
St.Ack On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote: > I always thought that the deadline represented a minimum period, rather > than a maximum. In other words, the deadline was around to prevent > people from putting out a release in 6 hours or whatever that had some > undiscovered flaws because people didn't have a chance to examine it. > > I don't remember us ever re-doing a vote because the period had been > exceeded without enough votes coming in. But looking at > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html , it doesn't seem to > settle the issue one way or another. Does anyone know if there is a > formal rule for this? > > I guess to be on the safe side, you could start a new vote and have > people re-cast. > > cheers, > Colin > > > On Tue, May 23, 2017, at 18:22, Mike Drob wrote: > > A question about protocol here... Two of the votes have come in past the > > deadline, but without them we wouldn't have had enough votes to get > > quorum > > on the release. Can we still accept them and move forward, or do we need > > to > > start over with a new vote? I'd really like to avoid the second option > > since getting enough votes here has been tenuous. > > > > I'm also making a note for myself for future votes that seven days is > > probably a better window than five. > > > > Mike > > > > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > Verified checksums > > > Build from source using Maven 3.0.4 (with -Pnative) > > > Successfully ran unit tests > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 22, 2017, at 01:18, Elliott Clark wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > verified signatures. > > > > build from source. > > > > Checked that everything looked to be in the correct locations. > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 3:49 PM, Masatake Iwasaki < > > > > iwasak...@oss.nttdata.co.jp> wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > * verified signature and mds. > > > > > * built and installed from source tarball by maven-3.0.4. > > > > > * built hadoop trunk against htrace-4.3.0-incubating. > > > > > * verified that spans in HDFS works by HTracedSpanReceiver and > htraced. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Masatake Iwasaki > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/17/17 05:40, Mike Drob wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Hi Devs, > > > > >> > > > > >> Please consider the following release candidate for Apache HTrace > > > > >> 4.3.0-incubating! > > > > >> > > > > >> http://people.apache.org/~mdrob/htrace-4.3.0-incubating-rc3/ > > > > >> > > > > >> The jars have been staged here: > > > > >> > > > > >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ > > > orgapachehtrace-1029 > > > > >> > > > > >> There's a few minor fixes in this release: > > > > >> > > > > >> ** Bug > > > > >> * [HTRACE-387] - htrace-c should have a test dependency on > htrace > > > > >> -htraced > > > > >> * [HTRACE-393] - Binary annotations are being shown as > base64 in > > > the > > > > >> zipkin frontend > > > > >> * [HTRACE-398] - Enforce requirement to build with Maven > 3.0.4 > > > from > > > > >> HTRACE-236 > > > > >> > > > > >> ** Improvement > > > > >> * [HTRACE-386] - htrace-c: add functions for retrieving the > span > > > ID > > > > >> to > > > > >> the public API > > > > >> > > > > >> RC History: > > > > >> RC0 - Discarded due to user error. > > > > >> RC1 - Missing some version string updates, vote failed. > > > > >> RC2 - Discarded due to missing HTRACE-398 > > > > >> RC3 - Current > > > > >> > > > > >> This vote will run for 5 days ( Sun May 21 21:30:00 UTC 2017 ) > > > > >> > > > > >> Thanks, > > > > >> Mike > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
