Hi Russell,

Thank you so much for putting this together, this would be really useful.

I ran locally prepare-rc.sh and cancel-rc.sh in dry run mode, everything
works end to end on my side.
Both commands generated the expected [VOTE] and [RESULT][VOTE] email
templates and completed successfully. All 86 bats tests pass as well.
Could not test publish-release since I did not have a local RC available.
(On a side note since many ASF projects would find this useful, I was
wondering if it might be worth eventually living somewhere shared like an
ASF repo or a template, such that other projects could also benefit from
it?)

Thank you so much for sharing this!

Warm regards,
Arnav

On Thu, May 7, 2026 at 3:23 AM Russell Spitzer <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hey Y'all,
>
> As we discussed briefly today, I think we can significantly improve
> Parquet's ability to do faster, more consistent releases by automating more
> of the release process.
>
> To that end, I've taken a cue from Apache Polaris's automated release
> pipeline and put together a PR for Apache Parquet Java:
>
> Issue: https://github.com/apache/parquet-java/issues/3547
> PR: https://github.com/apache/parquet-java/pull/3548
>
> The basic idea is to leverage Apache-owned SVN, Nexus, and GPG keys as
> secrets in GitHub Actions. The release manager's workflow becomes:
>
> Prepare RC — Run the "Prepare Release Candidate" GitHub Action
> Vote — Send the generated vote email and monitor the vote
> If passing — Run the "Publish Release" GitHub Action
> If failing — Run the "Cancel Release Candidate" GitHub Action
> Each action defaults to dry-run mode, and the scripts can also be run
> locally outside of GitHub Actions.
>
> What's missing before we can fully test this is filing a few Apache Infra
> tickets to get the proper secrets (Nexus, SVN, GPG) configured on the
> parquet-java repository. I'm happy to file those if folks are on board with
> the general approach. I've tested what I can locally with dry runs, but a
> real end-to-end test will require those secrets to be in place.
>
> Feedback and reviews welcome!
>
> Thanks, Russell
>

Reply via email to