Sorry for the name typo - *Enrico

On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 2:24 PM Norbert Kalmar <[email protected]> wrote:

> p.s.: These are pretty easy fixes to include/exclude the files Eniroc
> mentioned, so on second thought probably worth fixing and do an rc2.
> I'll create a jira and start to work on it. We'll see if anything else
> comes up or how the vote goes.
>
> - Norbert
>
> On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 2:20 PM Norbert Kalmar <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Enrico,
>>
>> I checked the release, you are right. I mainly did the comparison with
>> the 3.5.6 release as there were no changes on file/dependency level really.
>> All of these points stand for that release as well. That's why I didn't
>> notice or thought of it as release breaking flaw.
>>
>> In my opinion, we should definitely create a jira to fix these for the
>> next 3.5 release, and just go forward with 3.5.7. This is a bugfix release,
>> and it does fix a few critical bugs and thirdparty CVEs.
>> None of this was introduced with this bugfix version, so from my point of
>> view these are not breaking content errors.
>>
>> On the other hand I am biased I guess due to the fact I made the release
>> :)
>> So knowing this let me know if anyone thinks this is a -1 for rc1.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Norbert
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 2:01 PM Enrico Olivelli <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Norbert,
>>> thank you for working on this.
>>>
>>> I see differences between the contents of the source tarball and the
>>> git tag (using Meld, as suggested by Patrick some month ago), namely:
>>> - there is not checkstyleSuppressions.xml file, and mvn
>>> checkstyle:check fails (it is not bound to the default lifecycle, so
>>> mvn clean install still works)
>>> - there are ".c" generated files, they should not be part of the source
>>> release
>>> - there is not "dev" directory
>>> - there is not .travis.yml file
>>>
>>> I am somehow biased because I worked on this stuff for 3.6.0rc0,rc1 and
>>> rc2
>>> AKAIK these problems were already present in 3.5.6 so I am not sure
>>> these are blocker issues for a release.
>>>
>>> I am still continuing my tests
>>> I just wanted to inform you about my findings, this way we can choose
>>> what do to as soon as possible.
>>>
>>>
>>> Enrico
>>>
>>>
>>> Il giorno ven 7 feb 2020 alle ore 13:29 Norbert Kalmar
>>> <[email protected]> ha scritto:
>>> >
>>> > This is the second bugfix release candidate for 3.5.7. It fixes 21
>>> issues,
>>> > including third party CVE fixes, potential data loss and potential
>>> split
>>> > brain if some rare conditions exists.
>>> >
>>> > (I have signed rc0 with the wrong key - sorry for that). Everything
>>> else is
>>> > unchanged from rc0.
>>> >
>>> > The full release notes is available at:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310801&version=12346098
>>> >
>>> > *** Please download, test and vote by February 11th 2020, 23:59 UTC+0.
>>> ***
>>> >
>>> > Source files:
>>> > https://people.apache.org/~nkalmar/zookeeper-3.5.7-candidate-1/
>>> >
>>> > Maven staging repo:
>>> >
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.5.7/
>>> >
>>> > The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: release-3.5.7-rc1
>>> > (points to the same commit as rc0)
>>> >
>>> > ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
>>> > https://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
>>> >
>>> > Should we release this candidate?
>>>
>>

Reply via email to