Hello,

Ran Eric's test script:
$ git clone https://github.com/elalonde/kafka
$ ./kafka/bin/verify-kafka-rc.sh 2.4.0
https://home.apache.org/~manikumar/kafka-2.4.0-rc1
<https://home.apache.org/~manikumar/kafka-2.4.0-rc0>

- All PGP signatures are good
- All md5, sha1sums and sha512sums pass
- Had a few intermittent failures in tests that passed upon rerunning.

+1 (non-binding) from me.

Adam

On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 10:37 AM Manikumar <manikumar.re...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello Kafka users, developers and client-developers,
>
> This is the second candidate for release of Apache Kafka 2.4.0.
>
> This release includes many new features, including:
> - Allow consumers to fetch from closest replica
> - Support for incremental cooperative rebalancing to the consumer rebalance
> protocol
> - MirrorMaker 2.0 (MM2), a new multi-cluster, cross-datacenter replication
> engine
> - New Java authorizer Interface
> - Support for  non-key joining in KTable
> - Administrative API for replica reassignment
> - Sticky partitioner
> - Return topic metadata and configs in CreateTopics response
> - Securing Internal connect REST endpoints
> - API to delete consumer offsets and expose it via the AdminClient.
>
> Release notes for the 2.4.0 release:
> https://home.apache.org/~manikumar/kafka-2.4.0-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>
> ** Please download, test and vote by Tuesday, November 26, 9am PT **
>
> Kafka's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> https://kafka.apache.org/KEYS
>
> * Release artifacts to be voted upon (source and binary):
> https://home.apache.org/~manikumar/kafka-2.4.0-rc1/
>
> * Maven artifacts to be voted upon:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/kafka/
>
> * Javadoc:
> https://home.apache.org/~manikumar/kafka-2.4.0-rc1/javadoc/
>
> * Tag to be voted upon (off 2.4 branch) is the 2.4.0 tag:
> https://github.com/apache/kafka/releases/tag/2.4.0-rc1
>
> * Documentation:
> https://kafka.apache.org/24/documentation.html
>
> * Protocol:
> https://kafka.apache.org/24/protocol.html
>
> Thanks,
> Manikumar
>

Reply via email to