Good catch! How do you suggest we prevent it from happening next time?
On Mon, May 29, 2023 at 1:34 PM Zike Yang <z...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, all > > Recently, we found an issue with the `pulsar-all:3.0.0` image. The > pulsar library included in `pulsar-all:3.0.0` is the version of > 2.11.0: > > ``` > docker run apachepulsar/pulsar-all:3.0.0 ls lib/ | grep pulsar-broker > > org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-broker-2.11.0.jar > org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-broker-auth-sasl-2.11.0.jar > org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-broker-common-2.11.0.jar > ``` > > The root cause is that we use `apachepulsar/pulsar:latest` to build > the `pulsar-all` image. But at the time of building Pulsar 3.0.0, > `apachepulsar/pulsar:latest` was pointing to version 2.11.0. > > Therefore, the `pulsar-all:3.0.0` is actually a version 2.11.0 of > Pulsar but with 3.0.0 connectors and offloaders. > > Please see more detail in this issue: > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/20420 > > I have rebuilt the `pulsar-all:3.0.0` image: > > https://hub.docker.com/layers/snzkyang/pulsar-all/3.0.0/images/sha256-833ea988bce8c704b179cc4c9c38fac8980e108b0bc67454e06c22927990b169?context=explore > > Please help and verify it. And check if there are any other problems > with the image. > > I'm going to publish the image to the `apachepulsar` organization to > replace the old one. But before we do that, do we need a Vote or other > ways to reach a consensus? Is there any problem if we replace the old > image? > > Besides, I will also fix the docker build script to avoid similar issues. > > Thanks, > Zike Yang >
