There's a -1 vote here, so I think this RC fails anyway.

On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 10:30 AM Gengliang Wang <ltn...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Maxim,
>
> Thanks for the work!
> There is a bug fix from Bruce merged on branch-3.3 right after the RC1 is
> cut:
> SPARK-39093: Dividing interval by integral can result in codegen
> compilation error
> <https://github.com/apache/spark/commit/fd998c8a6783c0c8aceed8dcde4017cd479e42c8>
>
> So -1 from me. We should have RC2 to include the fix.
>
> Thanks
> Gengliang
>
> On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 6:15 PM Maxim Gekk
> <maxim.g...@databricks.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dongjoon,
>>
>>  > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SPARK/versions/12350369
>> > Since RC1 is started, could you move them out from the 3.3.0 milestone?
>>
>> I have removed the 3.3.0 label from Fix version(s). Thank you, Dongjoon.
>>
>> Maxim Gekk
>>
>> Software Engineer
>>
>> Databricks, Inc.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 11:06 AM Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon.h...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, Sean.
>>> It's interesting. I didn't see those failures from my side.
>>>
>>> Hi, Maxim.
>>> In the following link, there are 17 in-progress and 6 to-do JIRA issues
>>> which look irrelevant to this RC1 vote.
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SPARK/versions/12350369
>>>
>>> Since RC1 is started, could you move them out from the 3.3.0 milestone?
>>> Otherwise, we cannot distinguish new real blocker issues from those
>>> obsolete JIRA issues.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Dongjoon.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 11:46 AM Adam Binford <adam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I looked back at the first one (SPARK-37618), it expects/assumes a 0022
>>>> umask to correctly test the behavior. I'm not sure how to get that to not
>>>> fail or be ignored with a more open umask.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 1:56 PM Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm seeing test failures; is anyone seeing ones like this? This is
>>>>> Java 8 / Scala 2.12 / Ubuntu 22.04:
>>>>>
>>>>> - SPARK-37618: Sub dirs are group writable when removing from shuffle
>>>>> service enabled *** FAILED ***
>>>>>   [OWNER_WRITE, GROUP_READ, GROUP_WRITE, GROUP_EXECUTE, OTHERS_READ,
>>>>> OWNER_READ, OTHERS_EXECUTE, OWNER_EXECUTE] contained GROUP_WRITE
>>>>> (DiskBlockManagerSuite.scala:155)
>>>>>
>>>>> - Check schemas for expression examples *** FAILED ***
>>>>>   396 did not equal 398 Expected 396 blocks in result file but got
>>>>> 398. Try regenerating the result files. (ExpressionsSchemaSuite.scala:161)
>>>>>
>>>>>  Function 'bloom_filter_agg', Expression class
>>>>> 'org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.aggregate.BloomFilterAggregate'
>>>>> "" did not start with "
>>>>>       Examples:
>>>>>   " (ExpressionInfoSuite.scala:142)
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 6:01 AM Maxim Gekk
>>>>> <maxim.g...@databricks.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Please vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache Spark
>>>>>>  version 3.3.0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The vote is open until 11:59pm Pacific time May 10th and passes if a
>>>>>> majority +1 PMC votes are cast, with a minimum of 3 +1 votes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Spark 3.3.0
>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To learn more about Apache Spark, please see http://spark.apache.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The tag to be voted on is v3.3.0-rc1 (commit
>>>>>> 482b7d54b522c4d1e25f3e84eabbc78126f22a3d):
>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/spark/tree/v3.3.0-rc1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The release files, including signatures, digests, etc. can be found
>>>>>> at:
>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/spark/v3.3.0-rc1-bin/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signatures used for Spark RCs can be found in this file:
>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/spark/KEYS
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The staging repository for this release can be found at:
>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachespark-1402
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The documentation corresponding to this release can be found at:
>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/spark/v3.3.0-rc1-docs/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The list of bug fixes going into 3.3.0 can be found at the following
>>>>>> URL:
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SPARK/versions/12350369
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This release is using the release script of the tag v3.3.0-rc1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FAQ
>>>>>>
>>>>>> =========================
>>>>>> How can I help test this release?
>>>>>> =========================
>>>>>> If you are a Spark user, you can help us test this release by taking
>>>>>> an existing Spark workload and running on this release candidate,
>>>>>> then
>>>>>> reporting any regressions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you're working in PySpark you can set up a virtual env and install
>>>>>> the current RC and see if anything important breaks, in the Java/Scala
>>>>>> you can add the staging repository to your projects resolvers and test
>>>>>> with the RC (make sure to clean up the artifact cache before/after so
>>>>>> you don't end up building with a out of date RC going forward).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ===========================================
>>>>>> What should happen to JIRA tickets still targeting 3.3.0?
>>>>>> ===========================================
>>>>>> The current list of open tickets targeted at 3.3.0 can be found at:
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SPARK and search for "Target
>>>>>> Version/s" = 3.3.0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Committers should look at those and triage. Extremely important bug
>>>>>> fixes, documentation, and API tweaks that impact compatibility should
>>>>>> be worked on immediately. Everything else please retarget to an
>>>>>> appropriate release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ==================
>>>>>> But my bug isn't fixed?
>>>>>> ==================
>>>>>> In order to make timely releases, we will typically not hold the
>>>>>> release unless the bug in question is a regression from the previous
>>>>>> release. That being said, if there is something which is a regression
>>>>>> that has not been correctly targeted please ping me or a committer to
>>>>>> help target the issue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maxim Gekk
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Software Engineer
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Databricks, Inc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Adam Binford
>>>>
>>>

Reply via email to