Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[James]

Just noticed that some of the DSL_SQL issues are included in this release?
e.g. The first one: BEAM-2171, this is not expected,right?
On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 at 12:30 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version 2.1.0,
> as
> follows:
>
> [ ] +1, Approve the release
> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>
>
> The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
> * JIRA release notes [1],
> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org
> [2],
> which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
> * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API reference
> manual [6].
> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
> dist.apache.org [2].
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
> approval,
> with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
>
> Thanks,
> JB
>
> [1]
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12340528
> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
> [4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270
>

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

You mean in Jira Release Notes ?

Regards
JB

On 07/18/2017 06:52 PM, James wrote:

Just noticed that some of the DSL_SQL issues are included in this release?
e.g. The first one: BEAM-2171, this is not expected,right?
On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 at 12:30 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:


Hi everyone,

Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version 2.1.0,
as
follows:

[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)


The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
* JIRA release notes [1],
* the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org
[2],
which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
* all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
* source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
* website pull request listing the release and publishing the API reference
manual [6].
* Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
dist.apache.org [2].

The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
approval,
with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.

Thanks,
JB

[1]

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12340528
[2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
[3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
[4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270





--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Yeah, indeed, the issue like BEAM-2171 should not have "Fix Version" set to 
2.1.0.

Regards
JB

On 07/18/2017 06:52 PM, James wrote:

Just noticed that some of the DSL_SQL issues are included in this release?
e.g. The first one: BEAM-2171, this is not expected,right?
On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 at 12:30 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:


Hi everyone,

Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version 2.1.0,
as
follows:

[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)


The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
* JIRA release notes [1],
* the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org
[2],
which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
* all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
* source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
* website pull request listing the release and publishing the API reference
manual [6].
* Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
dist.apache.org [2].

The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
approval,
with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.

Thanks,
JB

[1]

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12340528
[2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
[3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
[4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270





--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Mingmin Xu]

The tasks of SQL should not be labeled as 2.1.0, I've updated some with
2.2.0, fail to change the 'closed' ones. Can anyone with the permission
update these tasks
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2171?jql=project%20%3D%20BEAM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.1.0%20AND%20component%20%3D%20dsl-sql?


Thanks!
Mingmin

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> Yeah, indeed, the issue like BEAM-2171 should not have "Fix Version" set
> to 2.1.0.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 07/18/2017 06:52 PM, James wrote:
>
>> Just noticed that some of the DSL_SQL issues are included in this release?
>> e.g. The first one: BEAM-2171, this is not expected,right?
>> On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 at 12:30 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version 2.1.0,
>>> as
>>> follows:
>>>
>>> [ ] +1, Approve the release
>>> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>>>
>>>
>>> The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
>>> * JIRA release notes [1],
>>> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org
>>> [2],
>>> which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
>>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
>>> * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
>>> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
>>> reference
>>> manual [6].
>>> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
>>> dist.apache.org [2].
>>>
>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
>>> approval,
>>> with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> JB
>>>
>>> [1]
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
>>> ctId=12319527&version=12340528
>>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
>>> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
>>> [4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>>> beam-1019/
>>> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
>>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270
>>>
>>>
>>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>



-- 

Mingmin

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Kenneth Knowles]

Done.

Since it is all on a feature branch and the release notes when it goes to
master will include "Add SQL DSL" I did not associate the little bits with
a release.

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Mingmin Xu  wrote:

> The tasks of SQL should not be labeled as 2.1.0, I've updated some with
> 2.2.0, fail to change the 'closed' ones. Can anyone with the permission
> update these tasks
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2171?jql=
> project%20%3D%20BEAM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.1.0%
> 20AND%20component%20%3D%20dsl-sql?
>
>
> Thanks!
> Mingmin
>
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, indeed, the issue like BEAM-2171 should not have "Fix Version" set
> > to 2.1.0.
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On 07/18/2017 06:52 PM, James wrote:
> >
> >> Just noticed that some of the DSL_SQL issues are included in this
> release?
> >> e.g. The first one: BEAM-2171, this is not expected,right?
> >> On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 at 12:30 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>>
> >>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version
> 2.1.0,
> >>> as
> >>> follows:
> >>>
> >>> [ ] +1, Approve the release
> >>> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
> >>> * JIRA release notes [1],
> >>> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org
> >>> [2],
> >>> which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
> >>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
> >>> * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
> >>> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
> >>> reference
> >>> manual [6].
> >>> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
> >>> dist.apache.org [2].
> >>>
> >>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
> >>> approval,
> >>> with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> JB
> >>>
> >>> [1]
> >>>
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
> >>> ctId=12319527&version=12340528
> >>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
> >>> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
> >>> [4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
> >>> beam-1019/
> >>> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
> >>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> > --
> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > jbono...@apache.org
> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 
> Mingmin
>

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Mingmin Xu]

Thanks Kenn. SQL DSL should be ready in the next version 2.2.0, and agree
to have an overall row "Add SQL DSL" instead of listing all the detailed
tasks.

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles 
wrote:

> Done.
>
> Since it is all on a feature branch and the release notes when it goes to
> master will include "Add SQL DSL" I did not associate the little bits with
> a release.
>
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Mingmin Xu  wrote:
>
> > The tasks of SQL should not be labeled as 2.1.0, I've updated some with
> > 2.2.0, fail to change the 'closed' ones. Can anyone with the permission
> > update these tasks
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2171?jql=
> > project%20%3D%20BEAM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.1.0%
> > 20AND%20component%20%3D%20dsl-sql?
> >
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Mingmin
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Yeah, indeed, the issue like BEAM-2171 should not have "Fix Version"
> set
> > > to 2.1.0.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On 07/18/2017 06:52 PM, James wrote:
> > >
> > >> Just noticed that some of the DSL_SQL issues are included in this
> > release?
> > >> e.g. The first one: BEAM-2171, this is not expected,right?
> > >> On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 at 12:30 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré  >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi everyone,
> > >>>
> > >>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version
> > 2.1.0,
> > >>> as
> > >>> follows:
> > >>>
> > >>> [ ] +1, Approve the release
> > >>> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> The complete staging area is available for your review, which
> includes:
> > >>> * JIRA release notes [1],
> > >>> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to
> dist.apache.org
> > >>> [2],
> > >>> which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
> > >>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
> > >>> * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
> > >>> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
> > >>> reference
> > >>> manual [6].
> > >>> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
> > >>> dist.apache.org [2].
> > >>>
> > >>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by
> majority
> > >>> approval,
> > >>> with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> JB
> > >>>
> > >>> [1]
> > >>>
> > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
> > >>> ctId=12319527&version=12340528
> > >>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
> > >>> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
> > >>> [4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
> > >>> beam-1019/
> > >>> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
> > >>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > > --
> > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > > jbono...@apache.org
> > > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 
> > Mingmin
> >
>



-- 

Mingmin

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Ahmet Altay]

Thank you JB.

I validated python wordcount and mobile gaming examples on Linux. Found one
issue (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2636). This does not need
to be a blocking issue for RC2, but if we end up having a RC3 we should
consider fixing this issue.

Ahmet

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Mingmin Xu  wrote:

> Thanks Kenn. SQL DSL should be ready in the next version 2.2.0, and agree
> to have an overall row "Add SQL DSL" instead of listing all the detailed
> tasks.
>
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles 
> wrote:
>
> > Done.
> >
> > Since it is all on a feature branch and the release notes when it goes to
> > master will include "Add SQL DSL" I did not associate the little bits
> with
> > a release.
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Mingmin Xu  wrote:
> >
> > > The tasks of SQL should not be labeled as 2.1.0, I've updated some with
> > > 2.2.0, fail to change the 'closed' ones. Can anyone with the permission
> > > update these tasks
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2171?jql=
> > > project%20%3D%20BEAM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.1.0%
> > > 20AND%20component%20%3D%20dsl-sql?
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > > Mingmin
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yeah, indeed, the issue like BEAM-2171 should not have "Fix Version"
> > set
> > > > to 2.1.0.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > On 07/18/2017 06:52 PM, James wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Just noticed that some of the DSL_SQL issues are included in this
> > > release?
> > > >> e.g. The first one: BEAM-2171, this is not expected,right?
> > > >> On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 at 12:30 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> j...@nanthrax.net
> > >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi everyone,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version
> > > 2.1.0,
> > > >>> as
> > > >>> follows:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> [ ] +1, Approve the release
> > > >>> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific
> comments)
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The complete staging area is available for your review, which
> > includes:
> > > >>> * JIRA release notes [1],
> > > >>> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to
> > dist.apache.org
> > > >>> [2],
> > > >>> which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
> > > >>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
> > > >>> * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
> > > >>> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
> > > >>> reference
> > > >>> manual [6].
> > > >>> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to
> the
> > > >>> dist.apache.org [2].
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by
> > majority
> > > >>> approval,
> > > >>> with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thanks,
> > > >>> JB
> > > >>>
> > > >>> [1]
> > > >>>
> > > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
> > > >>> ctId=12319527&version=12340528
> > > >>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
> > > >>> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
> > > >>> [4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
> > > >>> beam-1019/
> > > >>> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
> > > >>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > > > jbono...@apache.org
> > > > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > > > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > 
> > > Mingmin
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 
> Mingmin
>

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

So, I guess you are voting +1 on RC2, correct (just for the tracking) ?

Thanks,
Regards
JB

On 07/19/2017 08:00 AM, Ahmet Altay wrote:

Thank you JB.

I validated python wordcount and mobile gaming examples on Linux. Found one
issue (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2636). This does not need
to be a blocking issue for RC2, but if we end up having a RC3 we should
consider fixing this issue.

Ahmet

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Mingmin Xu  wrote:


Thanks Kenn. SQL DSL should be ready in the next version 2.2.0, and agree
to have an overall row "Add SQL DSL" instead of listing all the detailed
tasks.

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles 
wrote:


Done.

Since it is all on a feature branch and the release notes when it goes to
master will include "Add SQL DSL" I did not associate the little bits

with

a release.

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Mingmin Xu  wrote:


The tasks of SQL should not be labeled as 2.1.0, I've updated some with
2.2.0, fail to change the 'closed' ones. Can anyone with the permission
update these tasks
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2171?jql=
project%20%3D%20BEAM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.1.0%
20AND%20component%20%3D%20dsl-sql?


Thanks!
Mingmin

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 


wrote:


Yeah, indeed, the issue like BEAM-2171 should not have "Fix Version"

set

to 2.1.0.

Regards
JB

On 07/18/2017 06:52 PM, James wrote:


Just noticed that some of the DSL_SQL issues are included in this

release?

e.g. The first one: BEAM-2171, this is not expected,right?
On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 at 12:30 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <

j...@nanthrax.net



wrote:

Hi everyone,


Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version

2.1.0,

as
follows:

[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific

comments)



The complete staging area is available for your review, which

includes:

* JIRA release notes [1],
* the official Apache source release to be deployed to

dist.apache.org

[2],
which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
* all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
* source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
* website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
reference
manual [6].
* Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to

the

dist.apache.org [2].

The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by

majority

approval,
with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.

Thanks,
JB

[1]

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
ctId=12319527&version=12340528
[2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
[3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
[4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
beam-1019/
[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270





--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com





--

Mingmin







--

Mingmin





--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Aviem Zur]

Have the jars for RC2 been uploaded somewhere?

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> So, I guess you are voting +1 on RC2, correct (just for the tracking) ?
>
> Thanks,
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 07/19/2017 08:00 AM, Ahmet Altay wrote:
> > Thank you JB.
> >
> > I validated python wordcount and mobile gaming examples on Linux. Found
> one
> > issue (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2636). This does not
> need
> > to be a blocking issue for RC2, but if we end up having a RC3 we should
> > consider fixing this issue.
> >
> > Ahmet
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Mingmin Xu  wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks Kenn. SQL DSL should be ready in the next version 2.2.0, and
> agree
> >> to have an overall row "Add SQL DSL" instead of listing all the detailed
> >> tasks.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles  >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Done.
> >>>
> >>> Since it is all on a feature branch and the release notes when it goes
> to
> >>> master will include "Add SQL DSL" I did not associate the little bits
> >> with
> >>> a release.
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Mingmin Xu 
> wrote:
> >>>
>  The tasks of SQL should not be labeled as 2.1.0, I've updated some
> with
>  2.2.0, fail to change the 'closed' ones. Can anyone with the
> permission
>  update these tasks
>  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2171?jql=
>  project%20%3D%20BEAM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.1.0%
>  20AND%20component%20%3D%20dsl-sql?
> 
> 
>  Thanks!
>  Mingmin
> 
>  On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> j...@nanthrax.net
> >>>
>  wrote:
> 
> > Yeah, indeed, the issue like BEAM-2171 should not have "Fix Version"
> >>> set
> > to 2.1.0.
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On 07/18/2017 06:52 PM, James wrote:
> >
> >> Just noticed that some of the DSL_SQL issues are included in this
>  release?
> >> e.g. The first one: BEAM-2171, this is not expected,right?
> >> On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 at 12:30 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> >> j...@nanthrax.net
> 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>>
> >>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version
>  2.1.0,
> >>> as
> >>> follows:
> >>>
> >>> [ ] +1, Approve the release
> >>> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific
> >> comments)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The complete staging area is available for your review, which
> >>> includes:
> >>> * JIRA release notes [1],
> >>> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to
> >>> dist.apache.org
> >>> [2],
> >>> which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
> >>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
> >>> * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
> >>> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
> >>> reference
> >>> manual [6].
> >>> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to
> >> the
> >>> dist.apache.org [2].
> >>>
> >>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by
> >>> majority
> >>> approval,
> >>> with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> JB
> >>>
> >>> [1]
> >>>
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
> >>> ctId=12319527&version=12340528
> >>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
> >>> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
> >>> [4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
> >>> beam-1019/
> >>> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
> >>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> > --
> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > jbono...@apache.org
> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >
> 
> 
> 
>  --
>  
>  Mingmin
> 
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> 
> >> Mingmin
> >>
> >
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Hi Aviem,

as mentioned in the first e-mail:

- Distributions are available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/

- Artifacts are on the staging repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/

Regards
JB

On 07/19/2017 12:26 PM, Aviem Zur wrote:

Have the jars for RC2 been uploaded somewhere?

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:


So, I guess you are voting +1 on RC2, correct (just for the tracking) ?

Thanks,
Regards
JB

On 07/19/2017 08:00 AM, Ahmet Altay wrote:

Thank you JB.

I validated python wordcount and mobile gaming examples on Linux. Found

one

issue (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2636). This does not

need

to be a blocking issue for RC2, but if we end up having a RC3 we should
consider fixing this issue.

Ahmet

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Mingmin Xu  wrote:


Thanks Kenn. SQL DSL should be ready in the next version 2.2.0, and

agree

to have an overall row "Add SQL DSL" instead of listing all the detailed
tasks.

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles 


wrote:


Done.

Since it is all on a feature branch and the release notes when it goes

to

master will include "Add SQL DSL" I did not associate the little bits

with

a release.

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Mingmin Xu 

wrote:



The tasks of SQL should not be labeled as 2.1.0, I've updated some

with

2.2.0, fail to change the 'closed' ones. Can anyone with the

permission

update these tasks
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2171?jql=
project%20%3D%20BEAM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.1.0%
20AND%20component%20%3D%20dsl-sql?


Thanks!
Mingmin

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <

j...@nanthrax.net



wrote:


Yeah, indeed, the issue like BEAM-2171 should not have "Fix Version"

set

to 2.1.0.

Regards
JB

On 07/18/2017 06:52 PM, James wrote:


Just noticed that some of the DSL_SQL issues are included in this

release?

e.g. The first one: BEAM-2171, this is not expected,right?
On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 at 12:30 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <

j...@nanthrax.net



wrote:

Hi everyone,


Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version

2.1.0,

as
follows:

[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific

comments)



The complete staging area is available for your review, which

includes:

* JIRA release notes [1],
* the official Apache source release to be deployed to

dist.apache.org

[2],
which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
* all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
* source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
* website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
reference
manual [6].
* Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to

the

dist.apache.org [2].

The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by

majority

approval,
with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.

Thanks,
JB

[1]

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
ctId=12319527&version=12340528
[2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
[3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
[4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
beam-1019/
[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270





--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com





--

Mingmin







--

Mingmin





--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com





--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Ahmet Altay]

Yes, +1 on RC2.

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 5:10 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> Hi Aviem,
>
> as mentioned in the first e-mail:
>
> - Distributions are available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
>
> - Artifacts are on the staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 07/19/2017 12:26 PM, Aviem Zur wrote:
>
>> Have the jars for RC2 been uploaded somewhere?
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>> wrote:
>>
>> So, I guess you are voting +1 on RC2, correct (just for the tracking) ?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 07/19/2017 08:00 AM, Ahmet Altay wrote:
>>>
 Thank you JB.

 I validated python wordcount and mobile gaming examples on Linux. Found

>>> one
>>>
 issue (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2636). This does not

>>> need
>>>
 to be a blocking issue for RC2, but if we end up having a RC3 we should
 consider fixing this issue.

 Ahmet

 On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Mingmin Xu  wrote:

 Thanks Kenn. SQL DSL should be ready in the next version 2.2.0, and
>
 agree
>>>
 to have an overall row "Add SQL DSL" instead of listing all the detailed
> tasks.
>
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles
> 

 wrote:
>
> Done.
>>
>> Since it is all on a feature branch and the release notes when it goes
>>
> to
>>>
 master will include "Add SQL DSL" I did not associate the little bits
>>
> with
>
>> a release.
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Mingmin Xu 
>>
> wrote:
>>>

>> The tasks of SQL should not be labeled as 2.1.0, I've updated some
>>>
>> with
>>>
 2.2.0, fail to change the 'closed' ones. Can anyone with the
>>>
>> permission
>>>
 update these tasks
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2171?jql=
>>> project%20%3D%20BEAM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.1.0%
>>> 20AND%20component%20%3D%20dsl-sql?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Mingmin
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>>>
>> j...@nanthrax.net
>>>

>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yeah, indeed, the issue like BEAM-2171 should not have "Fix Version"

>>> set
>>
>>> to 2.1.0.

 Regards
 JB

 On 07/18/2017 06:52 PM, James wrote:

 Just noticed that some of the DSL_SQL issues are included in this
>
 release?
>>>
 e.g. The first one: BEAM-2171, this is not expected,right?
> On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 at 12:30 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>
 j...@nanthrax.net
>
>>
>>> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>>
>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version
>>
> 2.1.0,
>>>
 as
>> follows:
>>
>> [ ] +1, Approve the release
>> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific
>>
> comments)
>
>>
>>
>> The complete staging area is available for your review, which
>>
> includes:
>>
>>> * JIRA release notes [1],
>> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to
>>
> dist.apache.org
>>
>>> [2],
>> which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository
>> [4],
>> * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
>> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
>> reference
>> manual [6].
>> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to
>>
> the
>
>> dist.apache.org [2].
>>
>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by
>>
> majority
>>
>>> approval,
>> with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> JB
>>
>> [1]
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
>> ctId=12319527&version=12340528
>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
>> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
>> [4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>> beam-1019/
>> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270
>>
>>
>>
> --
 Jean-Baptiste Onofré
 jbono...@apache.org
 http://blog.nanthrax.net
 Talend - http://www.talend.com


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 
>>> Mingmin
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 
> Mingmin
>
>

>>> --

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Aviem Zur]

@JB

Hi, yes I saw that link, however those appear to be just the sources, not
jars.
Do we have built RC jars us to validate which are then deployed as is to
dist (renamed to remove -RC and so forth) or do we each compile these
manually and are assured that the sources in the dist are the actual ones
that the final jars will be built from?

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 7:16 PM Ahmet Altay 
wrote:

> Yes, +1 on RC2.
>
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 5:10 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Aviem,
> >
> > as mentioned in the first e-mail:
> >
> > - Distributions are available here:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
> >
> > - Artifacts are on the staging repository:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> >
> > On 07/19/2017 12:26 PM, Aviem Zur wrote:
> >
> >> Have the jars for RC2 been uploaded somewhere?
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> So, I guess you are voting +1 on RC2, correct (just for the tracking) ?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Regards
> >>> JB
> >>>
> >>> On 07/19/2017 08:00 AM, Ahmet Altay wrote:
> >>>
>  Thank you JB.
> 
>  I validated python wordcount and mobile gaming examples on Linux.
> Found
> 
> >>> one
> >>>
>  issue (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2636). This does
> not
> 
> >>> need
> >>>
>  to be a blocking issue for RC2, but if we end up having a RC3 we
> should
>  consider fixing this issue.
> 
>  Ahmet
> 
>  On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Mingmin Xu 
> wrote:
> 
>  Thanks Kenn. SQL DSL should be ready in the next version 2.2.0, and
> >
>  agree
> >>>
>  to have an overall row "Add SQL DSL" instead of listing all the
> detailed
> > tasks.
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles
> >  >
> 
>  wrote:
> >
> > Done.
> >>
> >> Since it is all on a feature branch and the release notes when it
> goes
> >>
> > to
> >>>
>  master will include "Add SQL DSL" I did not associate the little bits
> >>
> > with
> >
> >> a release.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Mingmin Xu 
> >>
> > wrote:
> >>>
> 
> >> The tasks of SQL should not be labeled as 2.1.0, I've updated some
> >>>
> >> with
> >>>
>  2.2.0, fail to change the 'closed' ones. Can anyone with the
> >>>
> >> permission
> >>>
>  update these tasks
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2171?jql=
> >>> project%20%3D%20BEAM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.1.0%
> >>> 20AND%20component%20%3D%20dsl-sql?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>> Mingmin
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> >>>
> >> j...@nanthrax.net
> >>>
> 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Yeah, indeed, the issue like BEAM-2171 should not have "Fix
> Version"
> 
> >>> set
> >>
> >>> to 2.1.0.
> 
>  Regards
>  JB
> 
>  On 07/18/2017 06:52 PM, James wrote:
> 
>  Just noticed that some of the DSL_SQL issues are included in this
> >
>  release?
> >>>
>  e.g. The first one: BEAM-2171, this is not expected,right?
> > On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 at 12:30 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> >
>  j...@nanthrax.net
> >
> >>
> >>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> >>
> >> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the
> version
> >>
> > 2.1.0,
> >>>
>  as
> >> follows:
> >>
> >> [ ] +1, Approve the release
> >> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific
> >>
> > comments)
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> The complete staging area is available for your review, which
> >>
> > includes:
> >>
> >>> * JIRA release notes [1],
> >> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to
> >>
> > dist.apache.org
> >>
> >>> [2],
> >> which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
> >> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository
> >> [4],
> >> * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
> >> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the
> API
> >> reference
> >> manual [6].
> >> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to
> >>
> > the
> >
> >> dist.apache.org [2].
> >>
> >> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by
> >>
> > majority
> >>
> >>> approval,
> >> with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> JB
> >>
> >> [1]
> >>
> >> https://issues.apache.org/ji

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

I don't understand as all jars are on the Nexus staging repository.
The zip are also on staging repository.

Regards
JB

On Jul 19, 2017, 18:47, at 18:47, Aviem Zur  wrote:
>@JB
>
>Hi, yes I saw that link, however those appear to be just the sources,
>not
>jars.
>Do we have built RC jars us to validate which are then deployed as is
>to
>dist (renamed to remove -RC and so forth) or do we each compile these
>manually and are assured that the sources in the dist are the actual
>ones
>that the final jars will be built from?
>
>On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 7:16 PM Ahmet Altay 
>wrote:
>
>> Yes, +1 on RC2.
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 5:10 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Aviem,
>> >
>> > as mentioned in the first e-mail:
>> >
>> > - Distributions are available here:
>> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
>> >
>> > - Artifacts are on the staging repository:
>> >
>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > JB
>> >
>> >
>> > On 07/19/2017 12:26 PM, Aviem Zur wrote:
>> >
>> >> Have the jars for RC2 been uploaded somewhere?
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> So, I guess you are voting +1 on RC2, correct (just for the
>tracking) ?
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>> Regards
>> >>> JB
>> >>>
>> >>> On 07/19/2017 08:00 AM, Ahmet Altay wrote:
>> >>>
>>  Thank you JB.
>> 
>>  I validated python wordcount and mobile gaming examples on
>Linux.
>> Found
>> 
>> >>> one
>> >>>
>>  issue (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2636). This
>does
>> not
>> 
>> >>> need
>> >>>
>>  to be a blocking issue for RC2, but if we end up having a RC3 we
>> should
>>  consider fixing this issue.
>> 
>>  Ahmet
>> 
>>  On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Mingmin Xu 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>  Thanks Kenn. SQL DSL should be ready in the next version 2.2.0,
>and
>> >
>>  agree
>> >>>
>>  to have an overall row "Add SQL DSL" instead of listing all the
>> detailed
>> > tasks.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles
>> > > >
>> 
>>  wrote:
>> >
>> > Done.
>> >>
>> >> Since it is all on a feature branch and the release notes when
>it
>> goes
>> >>
>> > to
>> >>>
>>  master will include "Add SQL DSL" I did not associate the little
>bits
>> >>
>> > with
>> >
>> >> a release.
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Mingmin Xu
>
>> >>
>> > wrote:
>> >>>
>> 
>> >> The tasks of SQL should not be labeled as 2.1.0, I've updated
>some
>> >>>
>> >> with
>> >>>
>>  2.2.0, fail to change the 'closed' ones. Can anyone with the
>> >>>
>> >> permission
>> >>>
>>  update these tasks
>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2171?jql=
>> >>> project%20%3D%20BEAM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.1.0%
>> >>> 20AND%20component%20%3D%20dsl-sql?
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks!
>> >>> Mingmin
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> >>>
>> >> j...@nanthrax.net
>> >>>
>> 
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Yeah, indeed, the issue like BEAM-2171 should not have "Fix
>> Version"
>> 
>> >>> set
>> >>
>> >>> to 2.1.0.
>> 
>>  Regards
>>  JB
>> 
>>  On 07/18/2017 06:52 PM, James wrote:
>> 
>>  Just noticed that some of the DSL_SQL issues are included in
>this
>> >
>>  release?
>> >>>
>>  e.g. The first one: BEAM-2171, this is not expected,right?
>> > On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 at 12:30 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> >
>>  j...@nanthrax.net
>> >
>> >>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi everyone,
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the
>> version
>> >>
>> > 2.1.0,
>> >>>
>>  as
>> >> follows:
>> >>
>> >> [ ] +1, Approve the release
>> >> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide
>specific
>> >>
>> > comments)
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> The complete staging area is available for your review,
>which
>> >>
>> > includes:
>> >>
>> >>> * JIRA release notes [1],
>> >> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to
>> >>
>> > dist.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>> [2],
>> >> which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76
>[3],
>> >> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central
>Repository
>> >> [4],
>> >> * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
>> >> * website pull request listing the release and publishing
>the
>> API
>> >> reference
>> >> manual [6].
>> >> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source
>release to
>> >>
>> >

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Kenneth Knowles]

+1 to the RC

Relating to Aviem's question, I think we need a release verification guide,
at the least as a section of the Release Guide. But if we follow through on
the prior thread of having a validation matrix with manual steps people
sign up for, that is even better, and saves repeated work.

As notes towards this, below this email I have included the steps to go
through the Java quickstart with the RC on DirectRunner and DataflowRunner,
which I have done. It should be also easy for other runners.

I think the full ValidatesRunner suite run against the release-2.1.0 branch
is adequate rather than trying to run them all against the RC, since we are
not trying (necessarily) to testing the release plugin. I wouldn't _oppose_
an easy way to run the full suite... (maybe just a fancy command line?)

Kenn



  
beam-2.1.0
  
  

  beam-2.1.0
  

  beam-2.1.0
  
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/


  archetype
  
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/

  

  


mvn archetype:generate \
  --settings settings.xml \
  -P beam-2.1.0 \
  -D archetypeGroupId=org.apache.beam \
  -D archetypeArtifactId=beam-sdks-java-maven-archetypes-examples \
  -D archetypeVersion=2.1.0 \
  -D groupId=org.example \
  -D artifactId=wordcountbeam \
  -D version="0.1" \
  -D package=org.apache.beam.examples \
  -D interactiveMode=false

cd wordcountbeam

mvn compile exec:java \
--settings ../settings.xml \
-Pdirect-runner \
-D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
-D exec.args="--inputFile=pom.xml --output=counts"


mvn compile exec:java \
--settings ../settings.xml \
-P dataflow-runner \
-D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
-D exec.args="--runner=DataflowRunner --project=
--gcpTempLocation=gs:///tmp
--inputFile=gs://apache-beam-samples/shakespeare/*
--output=gs:///counts"

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> I don't understand as all jars are on the Nexus staging repository.
> The zip are also on staging repository.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Jul 19, 2017, 18:47, at 18:47, Aviem Zur  wrote:
> >@JB
> >
> >Hi, yes I saw that link, however those appear to be just the sources,
> >not
> >jars.
> >Do we have built RC jars us to validate which are then deployed as is
> >to
> >dist (renamed to remove -RC and so forth) or do we each compile these
> >manually and are assured that the sources in the dist are the actual
> >ones
> >that the final jars will be built from?
> >
> >On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 7:16 PM Ahmet Altay 
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Yes, +1 on RC2.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 5:10 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Aviem,
> >> >
> >> > as mentioned in the first e-mail:
> >> >
> >> > - Distributions are available here:
> >> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
> >> >
> >> > - Artifacts are on the staging repository:
> >> >
> >https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> > JB
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 07/19/2017 12:26 PM, Aviem Zur wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Have the jars for RC2 been uploaded somewhere?
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> So, I guess you are voting +1 on RC2, correct (just for the
> >tracking) ?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks,
> >> >>> Regards
> >> >>> JB
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 07/19/2017 08:00 AM, Ahmet Altay wrote:
> >> >>>
> >>  Thank you JB.
> >> 
> >>  I validated python wordcount and mobile gaming examples on
> >Linux.
> >> Found
> >> 
> >> >>> one
> >> >>>
> >>  issue (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2636). This
> >does
> >> not
> >> 
> >> >>> need
> >> >>>
> >>  to be a blocking issue for RC2, but if we end up having a RC3 we
> >> should
> >>  consider fixing this issue.
> >> 
> >>  Ahmet
> >> 
> >>  On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Mingmin Xu 
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >>  Thanks Kenn. SQL DSL should be ready in the next version 2.2.0,
> >and
> >> >
> >>  agree
> >> >>>
> >>  to have an overall row "Add SQL DSL" instead of listing all the
> >> detailed
> >> > tasks.
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles
> >> >  >> >
> >> 
> >>  wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Done.
> >> >>
> >> >> Since it is all on a feature branch and the release notes when
> >it
> >> goes
> >> >>
> >> > to
> >> >>>
> >>  master will include "Add SQL DSL" I did not associate the little
> >bits
> >> >>
> >> > with
> >> >
> >> >> a release.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Mingmin Xu
> >
> >> >>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> 
> >> >> The tasks of SQL should not be labeled as 2.1.0, I've updated
> >some
> >> >>>
> >> >>

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Aljoscha Krettek]

+ 0.8

I tried running "mvn package” on my machine build it fails. This is the log 
output: https://gist.github.com/aljoscha/dc194303bede8bc635e2d8b691bb58f8 
. It fails 
when trying to build the Python part. Unfortunately I know almost nothing about 
this but one thing that caught my attention was this snipped "RuntimeError: Not 
in apache git tree; unable to find proto definitions.”. Could this be a problem?

Otherwise I’d say the RC is good and I did this:

 - verified the checksums and signature
 - checked that LICENSE and NOTICE are present
 - used the staged artefacts to create a Quickstart project
 - checked that the compiled Quickstart works with a Flink 1.2.1 cluster in 
batch and streaming mode

> On 19. Jul 2017, at 19:48, Kenneth Knowles  wrote:
> 
> +1 to the RC
> 
> Relating to Aviem's question, I think we need a release verification guide,
> at the least as a section of the Release Guide. But if we follow through on
> the prior thread of having a validation matrix with manual steps people
> sign up for, that is even better, and saves repeated work.
> 
> As notes towards this, below this email I have included the steps to go
> through the Java quickstart with the RC on DirectRunner and DataflowRunner,
> which I have done. It should be also easy for other runners.
> 
> I think the full ValidatesRunner suite run against the release-2.1.0 branch
> is adequate rather than trying to run them all against the RC, since we are
> not trying (necessarily) to testing the release plugin. I wouldn't _oppose_
> an easy way to run the full suite... (maybe just a fancy command line?)
> 
> Kenn
> 
> 
> 
>  
>beam-2.1.0
>  
>  
>
>  beam-2.1.0
>  
>
>  beam-2.1.0
>  
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
>
>
>  archetype
>  
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
>
>  
>
>  
> 
> 
> mvn archetype:generate \
>  --settings settings.xml \
>  -P beam-2.1.0 \
>  -D archetypeGroupId=org.apache.beam \
>  -D archetypeArtifactId=beam-sdks-java-maven-archetypes-examples \
>  -D archetypeVersion=2.1.0 \
>  -D groupId=org.example \
>  -D artifactId=wordcountbeam \
>  -D version="0.1" \
>  -D package=org.apache.beam.examples \
>  -D interactiveMode=false
> 
> cd wordcountbeam
> 
> mvn compile exec:java \
>--settings ../settings.xml \
>-Pdirect-runner \
>-D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
>-D exec.args="--inputFile=pom.xml --output=counts"
> 
> 
> mvn compile exec:java \
>--settings ../settings.xml \
>-P dataflow-runner \
>-D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
>-D exec.args="--runner=DataflowRunner --project=
> --gcpTempLocation=gs:///tmp
> --inputFile=gs://apache-beam-samples/shakespeare/*
> --output=gs:///counts"
> 
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
> 
>> I don't understand as all jars are on the Nexus staging repository.
>> The zip are also on staging repository.
>> 
>> Regards
>> JB
>> 
>> On Jul 19, 2017, 18:47, at 18:47, Aviem Zur  wrote:
>>> @JB
>>> 
>>> Hi, yes I saw that link, however those appear to be just the sources,
>>> not
>>> jars.
>>> Do we have built RC jars us to validate which are then deployed as is
>>> to
>>> dist (renamed to remove -RC and so forth) or do we each compile these
>>> manually and are assured that the sources in the dist are the actual
>>> ones
>>> that the final jars will be built from?
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 7:16 PM Ahmet Altay 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 Yes, +1 on RC2.
 
 On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 5:10 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> 
 wrote:
 
> Hi Aviem,
> 
> as mentioned in the first e-mail:
> 
> - Distributions are available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
> 
> - Artifacts are on the staging repository:
> 
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> 
> On 07/19/2017 12:26 PM, Aviem Zur wrote:
> 
>> Have the jars for RC2 been uploaded somewhere?
>> 
>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> So, I guess you are voting +1 on RC2, correct (just for the
>>> tracking) ?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>> 
>>> On 07/19/2017 08:00 AM, Ahmet Altay wrote:
>>> 
 Thank you JB.
 
 I validated python wordcount and mobile gaming examples on
>>> Linux.
 Found
 
>>> one
>>> 
 issue (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2636). This
>>> does
 not
 
>>> need
>>> 
 to be a blocking issue for RC2, but if we end up having a RC3 we
 should
 consider fixing this issue.
 
 Ahmet
>>>

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Hi Aljoscha

Do you have all python requirements installed on your machine ?

Especially, pip, setuptools, tox, ... ?

It sounds like a missing Python requirement on your machine to me.

Regards
JB

On 07/20/2017 10:36 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote:

+ 0.8

I tried running "mvn package” on my machine build it fails. This is the log output: 
https://gist.github.com/aljoscha/dc194303bede8bc635e2d8b691bb58f8 
. It fails when trying 
to build the Python part. Unfortunately I know almost nothing about this but one thing that 
caught my attention was this snipped "RuntimeError: Not in apache git tree; unable to find 
proto definitions.”. Could this be a problem?

Otherwise I’d say the RC is good and I did this:

  - verified the checksums and signature
  - checked that LICENSE and NOTICE are present
  - used the staged artefacts to create a Quickstart project
  - checked that the compiled Quickstart works with a Flink 1.2.1 cluster in 
batch and streaming mode


On 19. Jul 2017, at 19:48, Kenneth Knowles  wrote:

+1 to the RC

Relating to Aviem's question, I think we need a release verification guide,
at the least as a section of the Release Guide. But if we follow through on
the prior thread of having a validation matrix with manual steps people
sign up for, that is even better, and saves repeated work.

As notes towards this, below this email I have included the steps to go
through the Java quickstart with the RC on DirectRunner and DataflowRunner,
which I have done. It should be also easy for other runners.

I think the full ValidatesRunner suite run against the release-2.1.0 branch
is adequate rather than trying to run them all against the RC, since we are
not trying (necessarily) to testing the release plugin. I wouldn't _oppose_
an easy way to run the full suite... (maybe just a fancy command line?)

Kenn



  
beam-2.1.0
  
  

  beam-2.1.0
  

  beam-2.1.0
  
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/


  archetype
  
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/

  

  


mvn archetype:generate \
  --settings settings.xml \
  -P beam-2.1.0 \
  -D archetypeGroupId=org.apache.beam \
  -D archetypeArtifactId=beam-sdks-java-maven-archetypes-examples \
  -D archetypeVersion=2.1.0 \
  -D groupId=org.example \
  -D artifactId=wordcountbeam \
  -D version="0.1" \
  -D package=org.apache.beam.examples \
  -D interactiveMode=false

cd wordcountbeam

mvn compile exec:java \
--settings ../settings.xml \
-Pdirect-runner \
-D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
-D exec.args="--inputFile=pom.xml --output=counts"


mvn compile exec:java \
--settings ../settings.xml \
-P dataflow-runner \
-D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
-D exec.args="--runner=DataflowRunner --project=
--gcpTempLocation=gs:///tmp
--inputFile=gs://apache-beam-samples/shakespeare/*
--output=gs:///counts"

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:


I don't understand as all jars are on the Nexus staging repository.
The zip are also on staging repository.

Regards
JB

On Jul 19, 2017, 18:47, at 18:47, Aviem Zur  wrote:

@JB

Hi, yes I saw that link, however those appear to be just the sources,
not
jars.
Do we have built RC jars us to validate which are then deployed as is
to
dist (renamed to remove -RC and so forth) or do we each compile these
manually and are assured that the sources in the dist are the actual
ones
that the final jars will be built from?

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 7:16 PM Ahmet Altay 
wrote:


Yes, +1 on RC2.

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 5:10 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré



wrote:


Hi Aviem,

as mentioned in the first e-mail:

- Distributions are available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/

- Artifacts are on the staging repository:


https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/


Regards
JB


On 07/19/2017 12:26 PM, Aviem Zur wrote:


Have the jars for RC2 been uploaded somewhere?

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré



wrote:

So, I guess you are voting +1 on RC2, correct (just for the

tracking) ?


Thanks,
Regards
JB

On 07/19/2017 08:00 AM, Ahmet Altay wrote:


Thank you JB.

I validated python wordcount and mobile gaming examples on

Linux.

Found



one


issue (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2636). This

does

not



need


to be a blocking issue for RC2, but if we end up having a RC3 we

should

consider fixing this issue.

Ahmet

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Mingmin Xu 

wrote:


Thanks Kenn. SQL DSL should be ready in the next version 2.2.0,

and



agree



to have an overall row "Add SQL DSL" instead of listing all the

detailed

tasks.

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles


wrote:


Done.


Since it is all on

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Aviem Zur]

Thanks Kenn for the info,
+1 that this should be included in a release verification guide.

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 2:07 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> Hi Aljoscha
>
> Do you have all python requirements installed on your machine ?
>
> Especially, pip, setuptools, tox, ... ?
>
> It sounds like a missing Python requirement on your machine to me.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 07/20/2017 10:36 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote:
> > + 0.8
> >
> > I tried running "mvn package” on my machine build it fails. This is the
> log output:
> https://gist.github.com/aljoscha/dc194303bede8bc635e2d8b691bb58f8 <
> https://gist.github.com/aljoscha/dc194303bede8bc635e2d8b691bb58f8>. It
> fails when trying to build the Python part. Unfortunately I know almost
> nothing about this but one thing that caught my attention was this snipped
> "RuntimeError: Not in apache git tree; unable to find proto definitions.”.
> Could this be a problem?
> >
> > Otherwise I’d say the RC is good and I did this:
> >
> >   - verified the checksums and signature
> >   - checked that LICENSE and NOTICE are present
> >   - used the staged artefacts to create a Quickstart project
> >   - checked that the compiled Quickstart works with a Flink 1.2.1
> cluster in batch and streaming mode
> >
> >> On 19. Jul 2017, at 19:48, Kenneth Knowles 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> +1 to the RC
> >>
> >> Relating to Aviem's question, I think we need a release verification
> guide,
> >> at the least as a section of the Release Guide. But if we follow
> through on
> >> the prior thread of having a validation matrix with manual steps people
> >> sign up for, that is even better, and saves repeated work.
> >>
> >> As notes towards this, below this email I have included the steps to go
> >> through the Java quickstart with the RC on DirectRunner and
> DataflowRunner,
> >> which I have done. It should be also easy for other runners.
> >>
> >> I think the full ValidatesRunner suite run against the release-2.1.0
> branch
> >> is adequate rather than trying to run them all against the RC, since we
> are
> >> not trying (necessarily) to testing the release plugin. I wouldn't
> _oppose_
> >> an easy way to run the full suite... (maybe just a fancy command line?)
> >>
> >> Kenn
> >>
> >>
> >> 
> >>   
> >> beam-2.1.0
> >>   
> >>   
> >> 
> >>   beam-2.1.0
> >>   
> >> 
> >>   beam-2.1.0
> >>   
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>   archetype
> >>   
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
> 
> >> 
> >>   
> >> 
> >>   
> >> 
> >>
> >> mvn archetype:generate \
> >>   --settings settings.xml \
> >>   -P beam-2.1.0 \
> >>   -D archetypeGroupId=org.apache.beam \
> >>   -D archetypeArtifactId=beam-sdks-java-maven-archetypes-examples \
> >>   -D archetypeVersion=2.1.0 \
> >>   -D groupId=org.example \
> >>   -D artifactId=wordcountbeam \
> >>   -D version="0.1" \
> >>   -D package=org.apache.beam.examples \
> >>   -D interactiveMode=false
> >>
> >> cd wordcountbeam
> >>
> >> mvn compile exec:java \
> >> --settings ../settings.xml \
> >> -Pdirect-runner \
> >> -D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
> >> -D exec.args="--inputFile=pom.xml --output=counts"
> >>
> >>
> >> mvn compile exec:java \
> >> --settings ../settings.xml \
> >> -P dataflow-runner \
> >> -D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
> >> -D exec.args="--runner=DataflowRunner --project=
> >> --gcpTempLocation=gs:///tmp
> >> --inputFile=gs://apache-beam-samples/shakespeare/*
> >> --output=gs:///counts"
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I don't understand as all jars are on the Nexus staging repository.
> >>> The zip are also on staging repository.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> JB
> >>>
> >>> On Jul 19, 2017, 18:47, at 18:47, Aviem Zur 
> wrote:
>  @JB
> 
>  Hi, yes I saw that link, however those appear to be just the sources,
>  not
>  jars.
>  Do we have built RC jars us to validate which are then deployed as is
>  to
>  dist (renamed to remove -RC and so forth) or do we each compile these
>  manually and are assured that the sources in the dist are the actual
>  ones
>  that the final jars will be built from?
> 
>  On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 7:16 PM Ahmet Altay  >
>  wrote:
> 
> > Yes, +1 on RC2.
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 5:10 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>  
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Aviem,
> >>
> >> as mentioned in the first e-mail:
> >>
> >> - Distributions are available here:
> >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
> >>
> >> - Artifacts are on the staging repository:
> >>
> 
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
> >>
> >> Regar

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Aljoscha Krettek]

Hmm, interestingly it succeeds when I use
mvn clean package -DskipTests

Only when trying to run the tests will this fail with the output I posted 
earlier. I also made sure I have setuptools, pip, and nox.

Best,
Aljoscha

> On 20. Jul 2017, at 13:07, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote:
> 
> Hi Aljoscha
> 
> Do you have all python requirements installed on your machine ?
> 
> Especially, pip, setuptools, tox, ... ?
> 
> It sounds like a missing Python requirement on your machine to me.
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> On 07/20/2017 10:36 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote:
>> + 0.8
>> I tried running "mvn package” on my machine build it fails. This is the log 
>> output: https://gist.github.com/aljoscha/dc194303bede8bc635e2d8b691bb58f8 
>> >  >. It 
>> fails when trying to build the Python part. Unfortunately I know almost 
>> nothing about this but one thing that caught my attention was this snipped 
>> "RuntimeError: Not in apache git tree; unable to find proto definitions.”. 
>> Could this be a problem?
>> Otherwise I’d say the RC is good and I did this:
>>  - verified the checksums and signature
>>  - checked that LICENSE and NOTICE are present
>>  - used the staged artefacts to create a Quickstart project
>>  - checked that the compiled Quickstart works with a Flink 1.2.1 cluster in 
>> batch and streaming mode
>>> On 19. Jul 2017, at 19:48, Kenneth Knowles >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> +1 to the RC
>>> 
>>> Relating to Aviem's question, I think we need a release verification guide,
>>> at the least as a section of the Release Guide. But if we follow through on
>>> the prior thread of having a validation matrix with manual steps people
>>> sign up for, that is even better, and saves repeated work.
>>> 
>>> As notes towards this, below this email I have included the steps to go
>>> through the Java quickstart with the RC on DirectRunner and DataflowRunner,
>>> which I have done. It should be also easy for other runners.
>>> 
>>> I think the full ValidatesRunner suite run against the release-2.1.0 branch
>>> is adequate rather than trying to run them all against the RC, since we are
>>> not trying (necessarily) to testing the release plugin. I wouldn't _oppose_
>>> an easy way to run the full suite... (maybe just a fancy command line?)
>>> 
>>> Kenn
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  
>>>beam-2.1.0
>>>  
>>>  
>>>
>>>  beam-2.1.0
>>>  
>>>
>>>  beam-2.1.0
>>>  
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
>>>  
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>  archetype
>>>  
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
>>>  
>>> 
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> mvn archetype:generate \
>>>  --settings settings.xml \
>>>  -P beam-2.1.0 \
>>>  -D archetypeGroupId=org.apache.beam \
>>>  -D archetypeArtifactId=beam-sdks-java-maven-archetypes-examples \
>>>  -D archetypeVersion=2.1.0 \
>>>  -D groupId=org.example \
>>>  -D artifactId=wordcountbeam \
>>>  -D version="0.1" \
>>>  -D package=org.apache.beam.examples \
>>>  -D interactiveMode=false
>>> 
>>> cd wordcountbeam
>>> 
>>> mvn compile exec:java \
>>>--settings ../settings.xml \
>>>-Pdirect-runner \
>>>-D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
>>>-D exec.args="--inputFile=pom.xml --output=counts"
>>> 
>>> 
>>> mvn compile exec:java \
>>>--settings ../settings.xml \
>>>-P dataflow-runner \
>>>-D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
>>>-D exec.args="--runner=DataflowRunner --project=
>>> --gcpTempLocation=gs:///tmp
>>> --inputFile=gs://apache-beam-samples/shakespeare/* 
>>> 
>>> --output=gs:///counts"
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> >
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 I don't understand as all jars are on the Nexus staging repository.
 The zip are also on staging repository.
 
 Regards
 JB
 
 On Jul 19, 2017, 18:47, at 18:47, Aviem Zur >>> > wrote:
> @JB
> 
> Hi, yes I saw that link, however those appear to be just the sources,
> not
> jars.
> Do we have built RC jars us to validate which are then deployed as is
> to
> dist (renamed to remove -RC and so forth) or do we each compile these
> manually and are assured that the sources in the dist are the actual
> ones
> that the final jars will be built from?
> 
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 7:16 PM Ahmet Altay  >
> wrote:
> 
>> Yes, +1 on RC2.
>> 
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Agree: I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2647 about that.

Regards
JB

On 07/20/2017 02:32 PM, Aviem Zur wrote:

Thanks Kenn for the info,
+1 that this should be included in a release verification guide.

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 2:07 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:


Hi Aljoscha

Do you have all python requirements installed on your machine ?

Especially, pip, setuptools, tox, ... ?

It sounds like a missing Python requirement on your machine to me.

Regards
JB

On 07/20/2017 10:36 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote:

+ 0.8

I tried running "mvn package” on my machine build it fails. This is the

log output:
https://gist.github.com/aljoscha/dc194303bede8bc635e2d8b691bb58f8 <
https://gist.github.com/aljoscha/dc194303bede8bc635e2d8b691bb58f8>. It
fails when trying to build the Python part. Unfortunately I know almost
nothing about this but one thing that caught my attention was this snipped
"RuntimeError: Not in apache git tree; unable to find proto definitions.”.
Could this be a problem?


Otherwise I’d say the RC is good and I did this:

   - verified the checksums and signature
   - checked that LICENSE and NOTICE are present
   - used the staged artefacts to create a Quickstart project
   - checked that the compiled Quickstart works with a Flink 1.2.1

cluster in batch and streaming mode



On 19. Jul 2017, at 19:48, Kenneth Knowles 

wrote:


+1 to the RC

Relating to Aviem's question, I think we need a release verification

guide,

at the least as a section of the Release Guide. But if we follow

through on

the prior thread of having a validation matrix with manual steps people
sign up for, that is even better, and saves repeated work.

As notes towards this, below this email I have included the steps to go
through the Java quickstart with the RC on DirectRunner and

DataflowRunner,

which I have done. It should be also easy for other runners.

I think the full ValidatesRunner suite run against the release-2.1.0

branch

is adequate rather than trying to run them all against the RC, since we

are

not trying (necessarily) to testing the release plugin. I wouldn't

_oppose_

an easy way to run the full suite... (maybe just a fancy command line?)

Kenn



   
 beam-2.1.0
   
   
 
   beam-2.1.0
   
 
   beam-2.1.0
   
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/



 
 
   archetype
   
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/



 
   
 
   


mvn archetype:generate \
   --settings settings.xml \
   -P beam-2.1.0 \
   -D archetypeGroupId=org.apache.beam \
   -D archetypeArtifactId=beam-sdks-java-maven-archetypes-examples \
   -D archetypeVersion=2.1.0 \
   -D groupId=org.example \
   -D artifactId=wordcountbeam \
   -D version="0.1" \
   -D package=org.apache.beam.examples \
   -D interactiveMode=false

cd wordcountbeam

mvn compile exec:java \
 --settings ../settings.xml \
 -Pdirect-runner \
 -D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
 -D exec.args="--inputFile=pom.xml --output=counts"


mvn compile exec:java \
 --settings ../settings.xml \
 -P dataflow-runner \
 -D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
 -D exec.args="--runner=DataflowRunner --project=
--gcpTempLocation=gs:///tmp
--inputFile=gs://apache-beam-samples/shakespeare/*
--output=gs:///counts"

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 


wrote:


I don't understand as all jars are on the Nexus staging repository.
The zip are also on staging repository.

Regards
JB

On Jul 19, 2017, 18:47, at 18:47, Aviem Zur 

wrote:

@JB

Hi, yes I saw that link, however those appear to be just the sources,
not
jars.
Do we have built RC jars us to validate which are then deployed as is
to
dist (renamed to remove -RC and so forth) or do we each compile these
manually and are assured that the sources in the dist are the actual
ones
that the final jars will be built from?

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 7:16 PM Ahmet Altay 


wrote:


Yes, +1 on RC2.

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 5:10 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré



wrote:


Hi Aviem,

as mentioned in the first e-mail:

- Distributions are available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/

- Artifacts are on the staging repository:




https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/


Regards
JB


On 07/19/2017 12:26 PM, Aviem Zur wrote:


Have the jars for RC2 been uploaded somewhere?

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré



wrote:

So, I guess you are voting +1 on RC2, correct (just for the

tracking) ?


Thanks,
Regards
JB

On 07/19/2017 08:00 AM, Ahmet Altay wrote:


Thank you JB.

I validated python wordcount and mobile gaming examples on

Linux.

Found



one


issue (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2636). This

does

not



need


to be a blocking issue for RC2, but if we end up having a RC3 

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Ahmet Altay]

Aljoscha, your issues sounds like
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2587. It is possible that you
have an old pip version installed. Could you check that?

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:34 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> Agree: I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2647 about
> that.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 07/20/2017 02:32 PM, Aviem Zur wrote:
>
>> Thanks Kenn for the info,
>> +1 that this should be included in a release verification guide.
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 2:07 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Aljoscha
>>>
>>> Do you have all python requirements installed on your machine ?
>>>
>>> Especially, pip, setuptools, tox, ... ?
>>>
>>> It sounds like a missing Python requirement on your machine to me.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 07/20/2017 10:36 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote:
>>>
 + 0.8

 I tried running "mvn package” on my machine build it fails. This is the

>>> log output:
>>> https://gist.github.com/aljoscha/dc194303bede8bc635e2d8b691bb58f8 <
>>> https://gist.github.com/aljoscha/dc194303bede8bc635e2d8b691bb58f8>. It
>>> fails when trying to build the Python part. Unfortunately I know almost
>>> nothing about this but one thing that caught my attention was this
>>> snipped
>>> "RuntimeError: Not in apache git tree; unable to find proto
>>> definitions.”.
>>> Could this be a problem?
>>>

 Otherwise I’d say the RC is good and I did this:

- verified the checksums and signature
- checked that LICENSE and NOTICE are present
- used the staged artefacts to create a Quickstart project
- checked that the compiled Quickstart works with a Flink 1.2.1

>>> cluster in batch and streaming mode
>>>

 On 19. Jul 2017, at 19:48, Kenneth Knowles 
>
 wrote:
>>>

> +1 to the RC
>
> Relating to Aviem's question, I think we need a release verification
>
 guide,
>>>
 at the least as a section of the Release Guide. But if we follow
>
 through on
>>>
 the prior thread of having a validation matrix with manual steps people
> sign up for, that is even better, and saves repeated work.
>
> As notes towards this, below this email I have included the steps to go
> through the Java quickstart with the RC on DirectRunner and
>
 DataflowRunner,
>>>
 which I have done. It should be also easy for other runners.
>
> I think the full ValidatesRunner suite run against the release-2.1.0
>
 branch
>>>
 is adequate rather than trying to run them all against the RC, since we
>
 are
>>>
 not trying (necessarily) to testing the release plugin. I wouldn't
>
 _oppose_
>>>
 an easy way to run the full suite... (maybe just a fancy command line?)
>
> Kenn
>
>
> 
>
>  beam-2.1.0
>
>
>  
>beam-2.1.0
>
>  
>beam-2.1.0
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
>
 
>>>
  
>  
>archetype
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
>
 
>>>
  
>
>  
>
> 
>
> mvn archetype:generate \
>--settings settings.xml \
>-P beam-2.1.0 \
>-D archetypeGroupId=org.apache.beam \
>-D archetypeArtifactId=beam-sdks-java-maven-archetypes-examples
> \
>-D archetypeVersion=2.1.0 \
>-D groupId=org.example \
>-D artifactId=wordcountbeam \
>-D version="0.1" \
>-D package=org.apache.beam.examples \
>-D interactiveMode=false
>
> cd wordcountbeam
>
> mvn compile exec:java \
>  --settings ../settings.xml \
>  -Pdirect-runner \
>  -D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
>  -D exec.args="--inputFile=pom.xml --output=counts"
>
>
> mvn compile exec:java \
>  --settings ../settings.xml \
>  -P dataflow-runner \
>  -D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
>  -D exec.args="--runner=DataflowRunner
> --project=
> --gcpTempLocation=gs:///tmp
> --inputFile=gs://apache-beam-samples/shakespeare/*
> --output=gs:///counts"
>
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> j...@nanthrax.net
>

 wrote:
>
> I don't understand as all jars are on the Nexus staging repository.
>> The zip are also on staging repository.
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On Jul 19, 2017, 18:47, at 18:47, Aviem Zur 
>>
> wrote:
>>>
 @JB
>>>
>>> Hi, yes I saw that link, however those appear to be just the sources,
>>> not
>>> jars.
>>> Do we have built RC jars us to validate which are then deployed as is
>>> to
>>> dist

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Aljoscha Krettek]

 Is seem to have pip 9.0.1:

~ $ pip --version
pip 9.0.1 from /usr/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages (python 2.7)

> On 20. Jul 2017, at 18:07, Ahmet Altay  wrote:
> 
> Aljoscha, your issues sounds like
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2587. It is possible that you
> have an old pip version installed. Could you check that?
> 
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:34 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
> 
>> Agree: I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2647 about
>> that.
>> 
>> Regards
>> JB
>> 
>> 
>> On 07/20/2017 02:32 PM, Aviem Zur wrote:
>> 
>>> Thanks Kenn for the info,
>>> +1 that this should be included in a release verification guide.
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 2:07 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Aljoscha
 
 Do you have all python requirements installed on your machine ?
 
 Especially, pip, setuptools, tox, ... ?
 
 It sounds like a missing Python requirement on your machine to me.
 
 Regards
 JB
 
 On 07/20/2017 10:36 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote:
 
> + 0.8
> 
> I tried running "mvn package” on my machine build it fails. This is the
> 
 log output:
 https://gist.github.com/aljoscha/dc194303bede8bc635e2d8b691bb58f8 <
 https://gist.github.com/aljoscha/dc194303bede8bc635e2d8b691bb58f8>. It
 fails when trying to build the Python part. Unfortunately I know almost
 nothing about this but one thing that caught my attention was this
 snipped
 "RuntimeError: Not in apache git tree; unable to find proto
 definitions.”.
 Could this be a problem?
 
> 
> Otherwise I’d say the RC is good and I did this:
> 
>   - verified the checksums and signature
>   - checked that LICENSE and NOTICE are present
>   - used the staged artefacts to create a Quickstart project
>   - checked that the compiled Quickstart works with a Flink 1.2.1
> 
 cluster in batch and streaming mode
 
> 
> On 19. Jul 2017, at 19:48, Kenneth Knowles 
>> 
> wrote:
 
> 
>> +1 to the RC
>> 
>> Relating to Aviem's question, I think we need a release verification
>> 
> guide,
 
> at the least as a section of the Release Guide. But if we follow
>> 
> through on
 
> the prior thread of having a validation matrix with manual steps people
>> sign up for, that is even better, and saves repeated work.
>> 
>> As notes towards this, below this email I have included the steps to go
>> through the Java quickstart with the RC on DirectRunner and
>> 
> DataflowRunner,
 
> which I have done. It should be also easy for other runners.
>> 
>> I think the full ValidatesRunner suite run against the release-2.1.0
>> 
> branch
 
> is adequate rather than trying to run them all against the RC, since we
>> 
> are
 
> not trying (necessarily) to testing the release plugin. I wouldn't
>> 
> _oppose_
 
> an easy way to run the full suite... (maybe just a fancy command line?)
>> 
>> Kenn
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>   
>> beam-2.1.0
>>   
>>   
>> 
>>   beam-2.1.0
>>   
>> 
>>   beam-2.1.0
>>   
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
>> 
> 
 
> 
>> 
>>   archetype
>>   
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
>> 
> 
 
> 
>>   
>> 
>>   
>> 
>> 
>> mvn archetype:generate \
>>   --settings settings.xml \
>>   -P beam-2.1.0 \
>>   -D archetypeGroupId=org.apache.beam \
>>   -D archetypeArtifactId=beam-sdks-java-maven-archetypes-examples
>> \
>>   -D archetypeVersion=2.1.0 \
>>   -D groupId=org.example \
>>   -D artifactId=wordcountbeam \
>>   -D version="0.1" \
>>   -D package=org.apache.beam.examples \
>>   -D interactiveMode=false
>> 
>> cd wordcountbeam
>> 
>> mvn compile exec:java \
>> --settings ../settings.xml \
>> -Pdirect-runner \
>> -D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
>> -D exec.args="--inputFile=pom.xml --output=counts"
>> 
>> 
>> mvn compile exec:java \
>> --settings ../settings.xml \
>> -P dataflow-runner \
>> -D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
>> -D exec.args="--runner=DataflowRunner
>> --project=
>> --gcpTempLocation=gs:///tmp
>> --inputFile=gs://apache-beam-samples/shakespeare/*
>> --output=gs:///counts"
>> 
>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> j...@nanthrax.net
>> 
> 
> wrote:
>> 
>> I don't understand as all jars are on the Nexus staging repository.
>>> The zip are also o

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Ahmet Altay]

Thank you. Updated the JIRA with that information.

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Aljoscha Krettek 
wrote:

>  Is seem to have pip 9.0.1:
>
> ~ $ pip --version
> pip 9.0.1 from /usr/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages (python 2.7)
>
> > On 20. Jul 2017, at 18:07, Ahmet Altay  wrote:
> >
> > Aljoscha, your issues sounds like
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2587. It is possible that you
> > have an old pip version installed. Could you check that?
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:34 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Agree: I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2647 about
> >> that.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> JB
> >>
> >>
> >> On 07/20/2017 02:32 PM, Aviem Zur wrote:
> >>
> >>> Thanks Kenn for the info,
> >>> +1 that this should be included in a release verification guide.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 2:07 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Aljoscha
> 
>  Do you have all python requirements installed on your machine ?
> 
>  Especially, pip, setuptools, tox, ... ?
> 
>  It sounds like a missing Python requirement on your machine to me.
> 
>  Regards
>  JB
> 
>  On 07/20/2017 10:36 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote:
> 
> > + 0.8
> >
> > I tried running "mvn package” on my machine build it fails. This is
> the
> >
>  log output:
>  https://gist.github.com/aljoscha/dc194303bede8bc635e2d8b691bb58f8 <
>  https://gist.github.com/aljoscha/dc194303bede8bc635e2d8b691bb58f8>.
> It
>  fails when trying to build the Python part. Unfortunately I know
> almost
>  nothing about this but one thing that caught my attention was this
>  snipped
>  "RuntimeError: Not in apache git tree; unable to find proto
>  definitions.”.
>  Could this be a problem?
> 
> >
> > Otherwise I’d say the RC is good and I did this:
> >
> >   - verified the checksums and signature
> >   - checked that LICENSE and NOTICE are present
> >   - used the staged artefacts to create a Quickstart project
> >   - checked that the compiled Quickstart works with a Flink 1.2.1
> >
>  cluster in batch and streaming mode
> 
> >
> > On 19. Jul 2017, at 19:48, Kenneth Knowles 
> >>
> > wrote:
> 
> >
> >> +1 to the RC
> >>
> >> Relating to Aviem's question, I think we need a release verification
> >>
> > guide,
> 
> > at the least as a section of the Release Guide. But if we follow
> >>
> > through on
> 
> > the prior thread of having a validation matrix with manual steps
> people
> >> sign up for, that is even better, and saves repeated work.
> >>
> >> As notes towards this, below this email I have included the steps
> to go
> >> through the Java quickstart with the RC on DirectRunner and
> >>
> > DataflowRunner,
> 
> > which I have done. It should be also easy for other runners.
> >>
> >> I think the full ValidatesRunner suite run against the release-2.1.0
> >>
> > branch
> 
> > is adequate rather than trying to run them all against the RC, since
> we
> >>
> > are
> 
> > not trying (necessarily) to testing the release plugin. I wouldn't
> >>
> > _oppose_
> 
> > an easy way to run the full suite... (maybe just a fancy command
> line?)
> >>
> >> Kenn
> >>
> >>
> >> 
> >>   
> >> beam-2.1.0
> >>   
> >>   
> >> 
> >>   beam-2.1.0
> >>   
> >> 
> >>   beam-2.1.0
> >>   
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachebeam-1019/
> >>
> > 
> 
> > 
> >> 
> >>   archetype
> >>   
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachebeam-1019/
> >>
> > 
> 
> > 
> >>   
> >> 
> >>   
> >> 
> >>
> >> mvn archetype:generate \
> >>   --settings settings.xml \
> >>   -P beam-2.1.0 \
> >>   -D archetypeGroupId=org.apache.beam \
> >>   -D archetypeArtifactId=beam-sdks-
> java-maven-archetypes-examples
> >> \
> >>   -D archetypeVersion=2.1.0 \
> >>   -D groupId=org.example \
> >>   -D artifactId=wordcountbeam \
> >>   -D version="0.1" \
> >>   -D package=org.apache.beam.examples \
> >>   -D interactiveMode=false
> >>
> >> cd wordcountbeam
> >>
> >> mvn compile exec:java \
> >> --settings ../settings.xml \
> >> -Pdirect-runner \
> >> -D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
> >> -D exec.args="--inputFile=pom.xml --output=counts"
> >>
> >>
> >> mvn compile exec:java \
> >> --settings ../settings.xml \
> >> -P dataflow-runner \
> >> -D exec.mainClass=org.apache.beam.examples.WordCount \
> >> -D e

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Gently reminder, the vote is still open.

Here's my +1 (binding).

Regards
JB

On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi everyone,

Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version 2.1.0, as 
follows:


[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)


The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
* JIRA release notes [1],
* the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org [2], 
which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],

* all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
* source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
* website pull request listing the release and publishing the API reference 
manual [6].
* Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the 
dist.apache.org [2].


The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority approval, 
with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.


Thanks,
JB

[1] 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12340528 


[2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
[3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
[4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270


--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Lukasz Cwik]

I was going through the release, and noticed that during validation of the
quickstart when using Java. The steps for using Spark were not working for
me. It seems as though the version of spark-streaming_2.10 is missing from
the generated archetype pom.xml. Filed
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2662.

I currently set this as a blocker on 2.1.0 because I would expect that our
quickstart should work. If the Spark runner owners don't think this is a
blocker then I give the release a +1, otherwise -1. The quickstart for
Apex, Direct, Flink local cluster mode and Dataflow worked for me.

On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> Gently reminder, the vote is still open.
>
> Here's my +1 (binding).
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version 2.1.0,
>> as follows:
>>
>> [ ] +1, Approve the release
>> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>>
>>
>> The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
>> * JIRA release notes [1],
>> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org
>> [2], which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
>> * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
>> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
>> reference manual [6].
>> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
>> dist.apache.org [2].
>>
>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
>> approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> JB
>>
>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
>> ctId=12319527&version=12340528
>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
>> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
>> [4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>> beam-1019/
>> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270
>>
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Lukasz Cwik]

I cut PR/3620 to fix BEAM-2662 in master and cut PR/3621 to fix BEAM-2662
within the release-2.1.0 branch if it is deemed release blocking worthy.

Also, if we do decide to cut another release candidate. I would like to
include the fix for BEAM-2642 since this is an annoying bug that Google
Cloud customers have been hitting. Its not release blocking but is a very
nice to have and have cut PR/3622 to merge it into the release 2.1.0 branch.


On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Lukasz Cwik  wrote:

> I was going through the release, and noticed that during validation of the
> quickstart when using Java. The steps for using Spark were not working for
> me. It seems as though the version of spark-streaming_2.10 is missing from
> the generated archetype pom.xml. Filed https://issues.apache.
> org/jira/browse/BEAM-2662.
>
> I currently set this as a blocker on 2.1.0 because I would expect that our
> quickstart should work. If the Spark runner owners don't think this is a
> blocker then I give the release a +1, otherwise -1. The quickstart for
> Apex, Direct, Flink local cluster mode and Dataflow worked for me.
>
> On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
>
>> Gently reminder, the vote is still open.
>>
>> Here's my +1 (binding).
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>>
>> On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version
>>> 2.1.0, as follows:
>>>
>>> [ ] +1, Approve the release
>>> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>>>
>>>
>>> The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
>>> * JIRA release notes [1],
>>> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org
>>> [2], which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
>>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
>>> * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
>>> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
>>> reference manual [6].
>>> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
>>> dist.apache.org [2].
>>>
>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
>>> approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> JB
>>>
>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
>>> ctId=12319527&version=12340528
>>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
>>> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
>>> [4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>>> beam-1019/
>>> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
>>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbono...@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Hi Luke,

good catch. I tested with "my" beam-samples but not with quickstart.

I would consider as blocker.

Let's wait for feedback from others. Depending of this feedback, I will cancel 
RC2 and prepare a RC3 with the PR cherry-picked.


Thanks,
Regards
JB

On 07/23/2017 10:27 PM, Lukasz Cwik wrote:

I was going through the release, and noticed that during validation of the
quickstart when using Java. The steps for using Spark were not working for
me. It seems as though the version of spark-streaming_2.10 is missing from
the generated archetype pom.xml. Filed
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2662.

I currently set this as a blocker on 2.1.0 because I would expect that our
quickstart should work. If the Spark runner owners don't think this is a
blocker then I give the release a +1, otherwise -1. The quickstart for
Apex, Direct, Flink local cluster mode and Dataflow worked for me.

On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:


Gently reminder, the vote is still open.

Here's my +1 (binding).

Regards
JB


On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:


Hi everyone,

Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version 2.1.0,
as follows:

[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)


The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
* JIRA release notes [1],
* the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org
[2], which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
* all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
* source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
* website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
reference manual [6].
* Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
dist.apache.org [2].

The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.

Thanks,
JB

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
ctId=12319527&version=12340528
[2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
[3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
[4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
beam-1019/
[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270



--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com





--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Kenneth Knowles]

Nice catch.

Per our discussion on RC2 and now this, I started a spreadsheet for release
criteria.

Template: https://s.apache.org/beam-release-validation
Copy for this release: https://s.apache.org/beam-2.1.0-release-validation

I just directly took the validation criteria for the 2.0.0 and put it into
a spreadsheet form. Committers/PMC please ask for edit access I will grant
it (I'm just doing to this to avoid the work of scraping the list of
people). Everyone else should still suggest criteria to add (or remove) and
sign up to validate them.

Changes to the overall format are also welcome.

Kenn


On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 9:46 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> Hi Luke,
>
> good catch. I tested with "my" beam-samples but not with quickstart.
>
> I would consider as blocker.
>
> Let's wait for feedback from others. Depending of this feedback, I will
> cancel RC2 and prepare a RC3 with the PR cherry-picked.
>
> Thanks,
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 07/23/2017 10:27 PM, Lukasz Cwik wrote:
>
>> I was going through the release, and noticed that during validation of the
>> quickstart when using Java. The steps for using Spark were not working for
>> me. It seems as though the version of spark-streaming_2.10 is missing from
>> the generated archetype pom.xml. Filed
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2662.
>>
>> I currently set this as a blocker on 2.1.0 because I would expect that our
>> quickstart should work. If the Spark runner owners don't think this is a
>> blocker then I give the release a +1, otherwise -1. The quickstart for
>> Apex, Direct, Flink local cluster mode and Dataflow worked for me.
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Gently reminder, the vote is still open.
>>>
>>> Here's my +1 (binding).
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>>
>>> On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi everyone,

 Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version
 2.1.0,
 as follows:

 [ ] +1, Approve the release
 [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)


 The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
 * JIRA release notes [1],
 * the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org
 [2], which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
 * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
 * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
 * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
 reference manual [6].
 * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
 dist.apache.org [2].

 The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
 approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.

 Thanks,
 JB

 [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
 ctId=12319527&version=12340528
 [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
 [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
 [4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
 beam-1019/
 [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
 [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270


>>> --
>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> jbono...@apache.org
>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>
>>>
>>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Great initiative Kenn !

I will take a look.

Regards
JB

On 07/24/2017 07:57 AM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:

Nice catch.

Per our discussion on RC2 and now this, I started a spreadsheet for release
criteria.

Template: https://s.apache.org/beam-release-validation
Copy for this release: https://s.apache.org/beam-2.1.0-release-validation

I just directly took the validation criteria for the 2.0.0 and put it into
a spreadsheet form. Committers/PMC please ask for edit access I will grant
it (I'm just doing to this to avoid the work of scraping the list of
people). Everyone else should still suggest criteria to add (or remove) and
sign up to validate them.

Changes to the overall format are also welcome.

Kenn


On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 9:46 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:


Hi Luke,

good catch. I tested with "my" beam-samples but not with quickstart.

I would consider as blocker.

Let's wait for feedback from others. Depending of this feedback, I will
cancel RC2 and prepare a RC3 with the PR cherry-picked.

Thanks,
Regards
JB


On 07/23/2017 10:27 PM, Lukasz Cwik wrote:


I was going through the release, and noticed that during validation of the
quickstart when using Java. The steps for using Spark were not working for
me. It seems as though the version of spark-streaming_2.10 is missing from
the generated archetype pom.xml. Filed
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2662.

I currently set this as a blocker on 2.1.0 because I would expect that our
quickstart should work. If the Spark runner owners don't think this is a
blocker then I give the release a +1, otherwise -1. The quickstart for
Apex, Direct, Flink local cluster mode and Dataflow worked for me.

On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

Gently reminder, the vote is still open.


Here's my +1 (binding).

Regards
JB


On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi everyone,


Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version
2.1.0,
as follows:

[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)


The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
* JIRA release notes [1],
* the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org
[2], which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
* all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
* source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
* website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
reference manual [6].
* Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
dist.apache.org [2].

The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.

Thanks,
JB

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
ctId=12319527&version=12340528
[2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
[3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
[4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
beam-1019/
[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270



--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com





--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com





--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Hi guys,

We have three open issues for the 2.1.0 that we need to fix before I will be 
able to cut RC3:


https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12340528

I'm working on BEAM-2671.

Any help is welcome for the two other Jiras (BEAM-2587 and BEAM-2670).

Thanks !
Regards
JB

On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi everyone,

Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version 2.1.0, as 
follows:


[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)


The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
* JIRA release notes [1],
* the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org [2], 
which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],

* all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
* source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
* website pull request listing the release and publishing the API reference 
manual [6].
* Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the 
dist.apache.org [2].


The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority approval, 
with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.


Thanks,
JB

[1] 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12340528 


[2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
[3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
[4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270


--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Eugene Kirpichov]

We're down to 2 issues.

BEAM-2670 has been fixed.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2708 has a fix in review

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is the nasty one and we
don't understand it nor have a fix. Help is needed; some people who could
help are +Kenn Knowles  and +Aviem Zur 
 .

On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 6:41 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> We have three open issues for the 2.1.0 that we need to fix before I will
> be
> able to cut RC3:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12340528
>
> I'm working on BEAM-2671.
>
> Any help is welcome for the two other Jiras (BEAM-2587 and BEAM-2670).
>
> Thanks !
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version
> 2.1.0, as
> > follows:
> >
> > [ ] +1, Approve the release
> > [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
> >
> >
> > The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
> > * JIRA release notes [1],
> > * the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org
> [2],
> > which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
> > * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
> > * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
> > * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
> reference
> > manual [6].
> > * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
> > dist.apache.org [2].
> >
> > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
> approval,
> > with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > JB
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12340528
> >
> > [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
> > [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
> > [4]
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
> > [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
> > [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Hi,

Thanks Eugene for the sumup.

BEAM-2708 is now fixed.

The last blocking issue for RC3 is BEAM-2671. I spent time today on this one, 
investigating the different issues.


Agree that help from Aviem and Kenn would help for sure.

Aviem already started to kindly take a look on the Jira today.

Clearly, it would be great to fix BEAM-2671 in the coming 36 hours. I would like 
to submit RC3 to vote tomorrow or the day after (my time).


Thanks !
Regards
JB

On 08/02/2017 08:24 PM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:

We're down to 2 issues.

BEAM-2670 has been fixed.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2708 has a fix in review

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is the nasty one and we
don't understand it nor have a fix. Help is needed; some people who could
help are +Kenn Knowles  and +Aviem Zur 
  .

On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 6:41 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:


Hi guys,

We have three open issues for the 2.1.0 that we need to fix before I will
be
able to cut RC3:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12340528

I'm working on BEAM-2671.

Any help is welcome for the two other Jiras (BEAM-2587 and BEAM-2670).

Thanks !
Regards
JB

On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi everyone,

Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version

2.1.0, as

follows:

[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)


The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
* JIRA release notes [1],
* the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org

[2],

which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
* all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
* source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
* website pull request listing the release and publishing the API

reference

manual [6].
* Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
dist.apache.org [2].

The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority

approval,

with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.

Thanks,
JB

[1]


https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12340528


[2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
[3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
[4]

https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/

[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270


--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com





--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Another quick update. Regarding BEAM-2671, I asked help from Stas and Aviem on 
this one. It's our high priority as it's the main blocking issue before cutting RC3.


At some point, if we are not able to move fast on this one, I would propose to 
cut RC3 as it is.


Regards
JB

On 08/02/2017 08:52 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi,

Thanks Eugene for the sumup.

BEAM-2708 is now fixed.

The last blocking issue for RC3 is BEAM-2671. I spent time today on this one, 
investigating the different issues.


Agree that help from Aviem and Kenn would help for sure.

Aviem already started to kindly take a look on the Jira today.

Clearly, it would be great to fix BEAM-2671 in the coming 36 hours. I would like 
to submit RC3 to vote tomorrow or the day after (my time).


Thanks !
Regards
JB

On 08/02/2017 08:24 PM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:

We're down to 2 issues.

BEAM-2670 has been fixed.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2708 has a fix in review

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is the nasty one and we
don't understand it nor have a fix. Help is needed; some people who could
help are +Kenn Knowles  and +Aviem Zur 
  .

On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 6:41 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:


Hi guys,

We have three open issues for the 2.1.0 that we need to fix before I will
be
able to cut RC3:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12340528

I'm working on BEAM-2671.

Any help is welcome for the two other Jiras (BEAM-2587 and BEAM-2670).

Thanks !
Regards
JB

On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi everyone,

Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version

2.1.0, as

follows:

[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)


The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
* JIRA release notes [1],
* the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org

[2],

which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
* all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
* source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
* website pull request listing the release and publishing the API

reference

manual [6].
* Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
dist.apache.org [2].

The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority

approval,

with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.

Thanks,
JB

[1]

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12340528 



[2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
[3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
[4]

https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/

[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270


--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com







--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Eugene Kirpichov]

I did some more investigation on that JIRA
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 and my conclusion is:

We need to postpone that JIRA to 2.2.0 and finalize release 2.1.0 as-is.

The TL;DR of my investigation is that:
- We have some confidence that Spark runner in 2.1.0 generally works
properly: it passes ValidatesRunner tests, and there's been some amount of
manual testing.
- Release 2.0.0 does not contain a critical fix and, if I understand
correctly, Spark runner at 2.0.0 was basically unusable in streaming
cluster mode.
- So, even if the JIRA signals that there is something wrong in the Spark
runner at 2.1.0, it's definitely better than 2.0.0 so there is no
regression for the user.

I moved the JIRA to 2.2.0 so there are no blocking issues remaining for
2.1.0. JB - the next step is for you to proceed with cutting the RC,
correct?

Thanks.

On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:04 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote:

> Another quick update. Regarding BEAM-2671, I asked help from Stas and
> Aviem on
> this one. It's our high priority as it's the main blocking issue before
> cutting RC3.
>
> At some point, if we are not able to move fast on this one, I would
> propose to
> cut RC3 as it is.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 08/02/2017 08:52 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thanks Eugene for the sumup.
> >
> > BEAM-2708 is now fixed.
> >
> > The last blocking issue for RC3 is BEAM-2671. I spent time today on this
> one,
> > investigating the different issues.
> >
> > Agree that help from Aviem and Kenn would help for sure.
> >
> > Aviem already started to kindly take a look on the Jira today.
> >
> > Clearly, it would be great to fix BEAM-2671 in the coming 36 hours. I
> would like
> > to submit RC3 to vote tomorrow or the day after (my time).
> >
> > Thanks !
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On 08/02/2017 08:24 PM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:
> >> We're down to 2 issues.
> >>
> >> BEAM-2670 has been fixed.
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2708 has a fix in review
> >>
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is the nasty one and we
> >> don't understand it nor have a fix. Help is needed; some people who
> could
> >> help are +Kenn Knowles  and +Aviem Zur <
> aviem...@gmail.com>
> >>   .
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 6:41 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi guys,
> >>>
> >>> We have three open issues for the 2.1.0 that we need to fix before I
> will
> >>> be
> >>> able to cut RC3:
> >>>
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12340528
> >>>
> >>> I'm working on BEAM-2671.
> >>>
> >>> Any help is welcome for the two other Jiras (BEAM-2587 and BEAM-2670).
> >>>
> >>> Thanks !
> >>> Regards
> >>> JB
> >>>
> >>> On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>  Hi everyone,
> 
>  Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version
> >>> 2.1.0, as
>  follows:
> 
>  [ ] +1, Approve the release
>  [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
> 
> 
>  The complete staging area is available for your review, which
> includes:
>  * JIRA release notes [1],
>  * the official Apache source release to be deployed to
> dist.apache.org
> >>> [2],
>  which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
>  * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
>  * source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
>  * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
> >>> reference
>  manual [6].
>  * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
>  dist.apache.org [2].
> 
>  The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
> >>> approval,
>  with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
> 
>  Thanks,
>  JB
> 
>  [1]
> 
> >>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12340528
> >>>
> 
>  [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
>  [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
>  [4]
> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
>  [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
>  [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >>> jbono...@apache.org
> >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Hi Eugene,

Agree and thanks to have updated the Jira.

I'm cutting the RC3.

Thanks !
Regards
JB

On 08/05/2017 02:37 AM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:

I did some more investigation on that JIRA
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 and my conclusion is:

We need to postpone that JIRA to 2.2.0 and finalize release 2.1.0 as-is.

The TL;DR of my investigation is that:
- We have some confidence that Spark runner in 2.1.0 generally works
properly: it passes ValidatesRunner tests, and there's been some amount of
manual testing.
- Release 2.0.0 does not contain a critical fix and, if I understand
correctly, Spark runner at 2.0.0 was basically unusable in streaming
cluster mode.
- So, even if the JIRA signals that there is something wrong in the Spark
runner at 2.1.0, it's definitely better than 2.0.0 so there is no
regression for the user.

I moved the JIRA to 2.2.0 so there are no blocking issues remaining for
2.1.0. JB - the next step is for you to proceed with cutting the RC,
correct?

Thanks.

On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:04 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote:


Another quick update. Regarding BEAM-2671, I asked help from Stas and
Aviem on
this one. It's our high priority as it's the main blocking issue before
cutting RC3.

At some point, if we are not able to move fast on this one, I would
propose to
cut RC3 as it is.

Regards
JB

On 08/02/2017 08:52 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi,

Thanks Eugene for the sumup.

BEAM-2708 is now fixed.

The last blocking issue for RC3 is BEAM-2671. I spent time today on this

one,

investigating the different issues.

Agree that help from Aviem and Kenn would help for sure.

Aviem already started to kindly take a look on the Jira today.

Clearly, it would be great to fix BEAM-2671 in the coming 36 hours. I

would like

to submit RC3 to vote tomorrow or the day after (my time).

Thanks !
Regards
JB

On 08/02/2017 08:24 PM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:

We're down to 2 issues.

BEAM-2670 has been fixed.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2708 has a fix in review

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is the nasty one and we
don't understand it nor have a fix. Help is needed; some people who

could

help are +Kenn Knowles  and +Aviem Zur <

aviem...@gmail.com>

   .

On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 6:41 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:


Hi guys,

We have three open issues for the 2.1.0 that we need to fix before I

will

be
able to cut RC3:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12340528

I'm working on BEAM-2671.

Any help is welcome for the two other Jiras (BEAM-2587 and BEAM-2670).

Thanks !
Regards
JB

On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi everyone,

Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version

2.1.0, as

follows:

[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)


The complete staging area is available for your review, which

includes:

* JIRA release notes [1],
* the official Apache source release to be deployed to

dist.apache.org

[2],

which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
* all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
* source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
* website pull request listing the release and publishing the API

reference

manual [6].
* Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
dist.apache.org [2].

The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority

approval,

with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.

Thanks,
JB

[1]




https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12340528




[2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
[3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
[4]

https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/

[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270


--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com







--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com





--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Another quick update.

Aviem updated the Jira as he and his team wants to take a look. I'm also doing a 
new bisect on my side. I've given an extra day to move forward. If we don't have 
clear statement tonight, then, I will cut the RC3 tonight or tomorrow morning 
(my time).


Regards
JB

On 08/05/2017 02:37 AM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:

I did some more investigation on that JIRA
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 and my conclusion is:

We need to postpone that JIRA to 2.2.0 and finalize release 2.1.0 as-is.

The TL;DR of my investigation is that:
- We have some confidence that Spark runner in 2.1.0 generally works
properly: it passes ValidatesRunner tests, and there's been some amount of
manual testing.
- Release 2.0.0 does not contain a critical fix and, if I understand
correctly, Spark runner at 2.0.0 was basically unusable in streaming
cluster mode.
- So, even if the JIRA signals that there is something wrong in the Spark
runner at 2.1.0, it's definitely better than 2.0.0 so there is no
regression for the user.

I moved the JIRA to 2.2.0 so there are no blocking issues remaining for
2.1.0. JB - the next step is for you to proceed with cutting the RC,
correct?

Thanks.

On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:04 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote:


Another quick update. Regarding BEAM-2671, I asked help from Stas and
Aviem on
this one. It's our high priority as it's the main blocking issue before
cutting RC3.

At some point, if we are not able to move fast on this one, I would
propose to
cut RC3 as it is.

Regards
JB

On 08/02/2017 08:52 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi,

Thanks Eugene for the sumup.

BEAM-2708 is now fixed.

The last blocking issue for RC3 is BEAM-2671. I spent time today on this

one,

investigating the different issues.

Agree that help from Aviem and Kenn would help for sure.

Aviem already started to kindly take a look on the Jira today.

Clearly, it would be great to fix BEAM-2671 in the coming 36 hours. I

would like

to submit RC3 to vote tomorrow or the day after (my time).

Thanks !
Regards
JB

On 08/02/2017 08:24 PM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:

We're down to 2 issues.

BEAM-2670 has been fixed.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2708 has a fix in review

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is the nasty one and we
don't understand it nor have a fix. Help is needed; some people who

could

help are +Kenn Knowles  and +Aviem Zur <

aviem...@gmail.com>

   .

On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 6:41 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:


Hi guys,

We have three open issues for the 2.1.0 that we need to fix before I

will

be
able to cut RC3:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12340528

I'm working on BEAM-2671.

Any help is welcome for the two other Jiras (BEAM-2587 and BEAM-2670).

Thanks !
Regards
JB

On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi everyone,

Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version

2.1.0, as

follows:

[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)


The complete staging area is available for your review, which

includes:

* JIRA release notes [1],
* the official Apache source release to be deployed to

dist.apache.org

[2],

which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
* all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4],
* source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
* website pull request listing the release and publishing the API

reference

manual [6].
* Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the
dist.apache.org [2].

The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority

approval,

with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.

Thanks,
JB

[1]




https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12340528




[2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
[3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
[4]

https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/

[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270


--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com







--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com





--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Eugene Kirpichov]

If https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is a 2.1.0 blocker then
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-1868 also should be, because
it's a failure of another method in the same test and I suppose it
indicates brokenness to the same extent. Or both shouldn't.

Given the progress so far, the chances of resolving the JIRA quickly are
looking bleak to me now, and the release has been going on for almost 1
month, and many large improvements have been added to Beam HEAD since the
first RC was cut.

I'm still in favor of:
1) cutting 2.1.0 RC3 immediately, and acknowledging that streaming in Spark
runner in cluster mode is still (potentially) broken in this release - to
the same or smaller extent than in 2.0.0, so this is not a regression. The
extent is still not clear to me; I asked on the JIRA.
2) immediately or very soon after this 2.1.0, start cutting 2.2.0, and
target these issues to 2.2.0.

My argument is:
- 2.1.0 contains 2.5 months worth of new features, and releasing them will
benefit a lot of existing Beam users
- I don't think there are that many users for whom it's critically
important whether the first release with working Spark streaming will be
2.1.0 or 2.2.0, especially if we start cutting 2.2.0 very soon. This is
speculation though
- (subjective personal feeling) The release process requires participation
and momentum from community members, and letting it drag on for too long
loses that momentum.

We should anyway pursue resolving the issues asap, and users who were
eagerly waiting for Spark streaming to work properly can run Beam at HEAD
in the window between when they are first resolved and when 2.2.0 is
released.

What do you think?

On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 9:31 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote:

> Another quick update.
>
> Aviem updated the Jira as he and his team wants to take a look. I'm also
> doing a
> new bisect on my side. I've given an extra day to move forward. If we
> don't have
> clear statement tonight, then, I will cut the RC3 tonight or tomorrow
> morning
> (my time).
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 08/05/2017 02:37 AM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:
> > I did some more investigation on that JIRA
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 and my conclusion is:
> >
> > We need to postpone that JIRA to 2.2.0 and finalize release 2.1.0 as-is.
> >
> > The TL;DR of my investigation is that:
> > - We have some confidence that Spark runner in 2.1.0 generally works
> > properly: it passes ValidatesRunner tests, and there's been some amount
> of
> > manual testing.
> > - Release 2.0.0 does not contain a critical fix and, if I understand
> > correctly, Spark runner at 2.0.0 was basically unusable in streaming
> > cluster mode.
> > - So, even if the JIRA signals that there is something wrong in the Spark
> > runner at 2.1.0, it's definitely better than 2.0.0 so there is no
> > regression for the user.
> >
> > I moved the JIRA to 2.2.0 so there are no blocking issues remaining for
> > 2.1.0. JB - the next step is for you to proceed with cutting the RC,
> > correct?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:04 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Another quick update. Regarding BEAM-2671, I asked help from Stas and
> >> Aviem on
> >> this one. It's our high priority as it's the main blocking issue before
> >> cutting RC3.
> >>
> >> At some point, if we are not able to move fast on this one, I would
> >> propose to
> >> cut RC3 as it is.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> JB
> >>
> >> On 08/02/2017 08:52 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Thanks Eugene for the sumup.
> >>>
> >>> BEAM-2708 is now fixed.
> >>>
> >>> The last blocking issue for RC3 is BEAM-2671. I spent time today on
> this
> >> one,
> >>> investigating the different issues.
> >>>
> >>> Agree that help from Aviem and Kenn would help for sure.
> >>>
> >>> Aviem already started to kindly take a look on the Jira today.
> >>>
> >>> Clearly, it would be great to fix BEAM-2671 in the coming 36 hours. I
> >> would like
> >>> to submit RC3 to vote tomorrow or the day after (my time).
> >>>
> >>> Thanks !
> >>> Regards
> >>> JB
> >>>
> >>> On 08/02/2017 08:24 PM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:
>  We're down to 2 issues.
> 
>  BEAM-2670 has been fixed.
>  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2708 has a fix in review
> 
>  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is the nasty one and
> we
>  don't understand it nor have a fix. Help is needed; some people who
> >> could
>  help are +Kenn Knowles  and +Aviem Zur <
> >> aviem...@gmail.com>
> .
> 
>  On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 6:41 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré  >
>  wrote:
> 
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > We have three open issues for the 2.1.0 that we need to fix before I
> >> will
> > be
> > able to cut RC3:
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12340528
> >
> > I'm working on BEAM-2671.
> >
> > Any help is welcome for the two other Jiras (BEAM-2587 and
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Kenneth Knowles]

I agree with Eugene's proposal.

Suppose it takes  days to grok and fix CreateStreamTest. If we compare
delaying 2.1.0 versus releasing it immediately and starting 2.2.0:

   - Users get 2.1.0 ASAP and then 2.2.0 in  days
   - Users get 2.1.0 in  days

The now-failing tests were flaky, and we have some confidence that the
changes that caused the failing are good. So if this is an apparent
regression for a user, it is likely that they are in danger already.

A third alternative is that users get 2.1.0 ASAP, 2.2.0 ASAP after that to
keep the cadence going, and 2.3.0 after  days if we can't sort this
quickly. This is consistent with treating it as an existing and ongoing
bug, which it likely is.

Kenn

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Eugene Kirpichov <
kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote:

> If https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is a 2.1.0 blocker then
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-1868 also should be, because
> it's a failure of another method in the same test and I suppose it
> indicates brokenness to the same extent. Or both shouldn't.
>
> Given the progress so far, the chances of resolving the JIRA quickly are
> looking bleak to me now, and the release has been going on for almost 1
> month, and many large improvements have been added to Beam HEAD since the
> first RC was cut.
>
> I'm still in favor of:
> 1) cutting 2.1.0 RC3 immediately, and acknowledging that streaming in Spark
> runner in cluster mode is still (potentially) broken in this release - to
> the same or smaller extent than in 2.0.0, so this is not a regression. The
> extent is still not clear to me; I asked on the JIRA.
> 2) immediately or very soon after this 2.1.0, start cutting 2.2.0, and
> target these issues to 2.2.0.
>
> My argument is:
> - 2.1.0 contains 2.5 months worth of new features, and releasing them will
> benefit a lot of existing Beam users
> - I don't think there are that many users for whom it's critically
> important whether the first release with working Spark streaming will be
> 2.1.0 or 2.2.0, especially if we start cutting 2.2.0 very soon. This is
> speculation though
> - (subjective personal feeling) The release process requires participation
> and momentum from community members, and letting it drag on for too long
> loses that momentum.
>
> We should anyway pursue resolving the issues asap, and users who were
> eagerly waiting for Spark streaming to work properly can run Beam at HEAD
> in the window between when they are first resolved and when 2.2.0 is
> released.
>
> What do you think?
>
> On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 9:31 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
>
> > Another quick update.
> >
> > Aviem updated the Jira as he and his team wants to take a look. I'm also
> > doing a
> > new bisect on my side. I've given an extra day to move forward. If we
> > don't have
> > clear statement tonight, then, I will cut the RC3 tonight or tomorrow
> > morning
> > (my time).
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On 08/05/2017 02:37 AM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:
> > > I did some more investigation on that JIRA
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 and my conclusion is:
> > >
> > > We need to postpone that JIRA to 2.2.0 and finalize release 2.1.0
> as-is.
> > >
> > > The TL;DR of my investigation is that:
> > > - We have some confidence that Spark runner in 2.1.0 generally works
> > > properly: it passes ValidatesRunner tests, and there's been some amount
> > of
> > > manual testing.
> > > - Release 2.0.0 does not contain a critical fix and, if I understand
> > > correctly, Spark runner at 2.0.0 was basically unusable in streaming
> > > cluster mode.
> > > - So, even if the JIRA signals that there is something wrong in the
> Spark
> > > runner at 2.1.0, it's definitely better than 2.0.0 so there is no
> > > regression for the user.
> > >
> > > I moved the JIRA to 2.2.0 so there are no blocking issues remaining for
> > > 2.1.0. JB - the next step is for you to proceed with cutting the RC,
> > > correct?
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:04 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Another quick update. Regarding BEAM-2671, I asked help from Stas and
> > >> Aviem on
> > >> this one. It's our high priority as it's the main blocking issue
> before
> > >> cutting RC3.
> > >>
> > >> At some point, if we are not able to move fast on this one, I would
> > >> propose to
> > >> cut RC3 as it is.
> > >>
> > >> Regards
> > >> JB
> > >>
> > >> On 08/02/2017 08:52 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks Eugene for the sumup.
> > >>>
> > >>> BEAM-2708 is now fixed.
> > >>>
> > >>> The last blocking issue for RC3 is BEAM-2671. I spent time today on
> > this
> > >> one,
> > >>> investigating the different issues.
> > >>>
> > >>> Agree that help from Aviem and Kenn would help for sure.
> > >>>
> > >>> Aviem already started to kindly take a look on the Jira today.
> > >>>
> > >>> Clearly, it would be great to fix BEAM-2671 in the coming 36 hours. I
> > >> would l

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Hi Kenn,

As said, I just gave an extra couple of days to Stas and I to try to fix the 
issue. However, we didn't fix it yet, and I'm still struggling to find the exact 
cause as we have different tests failures.


So, I will cut RC3 as it is and we will fix the tests issue for 2.2.0 that we 
can release pretty quickly.

We are holding the release for too long (roughly a month).

Regards
JB

On 08/08/2017 01:27 AM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:

I agree with Eugene's proposal.

Suppose it takes  days to grok and fix CreateStreamTest. If we compare
delaying 2.1.0 versus releasing it immediately and starting 2.2.0:

- Users get 2.1.0 ASAP and then 2.2.0 in  days
- Users get 2.1.0 in  days

The now-failing tests were flaky, and we have some confidence that the
changes that caused the failing are good. So if this is an apparent
regression for a user, it is likely that they are in danger already.

A third alternative is that users get 2.1.0 ASAP, 2.2.0 ASAP after that to
keep the cadence going, and 2.3.0 after  days if we can't sort this
quickly. This is consistent with treating it as an existing and ongoing
bug, which it likely is.

Kenn

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Eugene Kirpichov <
kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote:


If https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is a 2.1.0 blocker then
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-1868 also should be, because
it's a failure of another method in the same test and I suppose it
indicates brokenness to the same extent. Or both shouldn't.

Given the progress so far, the chances of resolving the JIRA quickly are
looking bleak to me now, and the release has been going on for almost 1
month, and many large improvements have been added to Beam HEAD since the
first RC was cut.

I'm still in favor of:
1) cutting 2.1.0 RC3 immediately, and acknowledging that streaming in Spark
runner in cluster mode is still (potentially) broken in this release - to
the same or smaller extent than in 2.0.0, so this is not a regression. The
extent is still not clear to me; I asked on the JIRA.
2) immediately or very soon after this 2.1.0, start cutting 2.2.0, and
target these issues to 2.2.0.

My argument is:
- 2.1.0 contains 2.5 months worth of new features, and releasing them will
benefit a lot of existing Beam users
- I don't think there are that many users for whom it's critically
important whether the first release with working Spark streaming will be
2.1.0 or 2.2.0, especially if we start cutting 2.2.0 very soon. This is
speculation though
- (subjective personal feeling) The release process requires participation
and momentum from community members, and letting it drag on for too long
loses that momentum.

We should anyway pursue resolving the issues asap, and users who were
eagerly waiting for Spark streaming to work properly can run Beam at HEAD
in the window between when they are first resolved and when 2.2.0 is
released.

What do you think?

On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 9:31 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:


Another quick update.

Aviem updated the Jira as he and his team wants to take a look. I'm also
doing a
new bisect on my side. I've given an extra day to move forward. If we
don't have
clear statement tonight, then, I will cut the RC3 tonight or tomorrow
morning
(my time).

Regards
JB

On 08/05/2017 02:37 AM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:

I did some more investigation on that JIRA
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 and my conclusion is:

We need to postpone that JIRA to 2.2.0 and finalize release 2.1.0

as-is.


The TL;DR of my investigation is that:
- We have some confidence that Spark runner in 2.1.0 generally works
properly: it passes ValidatesRunner tests, and there's been some amount

of

manual testing.
- Release 2.0.0 does not contain a critical fix and, if I understand
correctly, Spark runner at 2.0.0 was basically unusable in streaming
cluster mode.
- So, even if the JIRA signals that there is something wrong in the

Spark

runner at 2.1.0, it's definitely better than 2.0.0 so there is no
regression for the user.

I moved the JIRA to 2.2.0 so there are no blocking issues remaining for
2.1.0. JB - the next step is for you to proceed with cutting the RC,
correct?

Thanks.

On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:04 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 

wrote:



Another quick update. Regarding BEAM-2671, I asked help from Stas and
Aviem on
this one. It's our high priority as it's the main blocking issue

before

cutting RC3.

At some point, if we are not able to move fast on this one, I would
propose to
cut RC3 as it is.

Regards
JB

On 08/02/2017 08:52 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi,

Thanks Eugene for the sumup.

BEAM-2708 is now fixed.

The last blocking issue for RC3 is BEAM-2671. I spent time today on

this

one,

investigating the different issues.

Agree that help from Aviem and Kenn would help for sure.

Aviem already started to kindly take a look on the Jira today.

Clearly, it would be great to fix BEAM-2671 in the coming 36 hours. I

would like

to submit RC3 to v

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1.0, release candidate #2

[Aljoscha Krettek]

+1 to releasing now and working on a fix for a follow-up release.

> On 8. Aug 2017, at 06:52, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote:
> 
> Hi Kenn,
> 
> As said, I just gave an extra couple of days to Stas and I to try to fix the 
> issue. However, we didn't fix it yet, and I'm still struggling to find the 
> exact cause as we have different tests failures.
> 
> So, I will cut RC3 as it is and we will fix the tests issue for 2.2.0 that we 
> can release pretty quickly.
> We are holding the release for too long (roughly a month).
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> On 08/08/2017 01:27 AM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
>> I agree with Eugene's proposal.
>> Suppose it takes  days to grok and fix CreateStreamTest. If we compare
>> delaying 2.1.0 versus releasing it immediately and starting 2.2.0:
>>- Users get 2.1.0 ASAP and then 2.2.0 in  days
>>- Users get 2.1.0 in  days
>> The now-failing tests were flaky, and we have some confidence that the
>> changes that caused the failing are good. So if this is an apparent
>> regression for a user, it is likely that they are in danger already.
>> A third alternative is that users get 2.1.0 ASAP, 2.2.0 ASAP after that to
>> keep the cadence going, and 2.3.0 after  days if we can't sort this
>> quickly. This is consistent with treating it as an existing and ongoing
>> bug, which it likely is.
>> Kenn
>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Eugene Kirpichov <
>> kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
>>> If https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is a 2.1.0 blocker then
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-1868 also should be, because
>>> it's a failure of another method in the same test and I suppose it
>>> indicates brokenness to the same extent. Or both shouldn't.
>>> 
>>> Given the progress so far, the chances of resolving the JIRA quickly are
>>> looking bleak to me now, and the release has been going on for almost 1
>>> month, and many large improvements have been added to Beam HEAD since the
>>> first RC was cut.
>>> 
>>> I'm still in favor of:
>>> 1) cutting 2.1.0 RC3 immediately, and acknowledging that streaming in Spark
>>> runner in cluster mode is still (potentially) broken in this release - to
>>> the same or smaller extent than in 2.0.0, so this is not a regression. The
>>> extent is still not clear to me; I asked on the JIRA.
>>> 2) immediately or very soon after this 2.1.0, start cutting 2.2.0, and
>>> target these issues to 2.2.0.
>>> 
>>> My argument is:
>>> - 2.1.0 contains 2.5 months worth of new features, and releasing them will
>>> benefit a lot of existing Beam users
>>> - I don't think there are that many users for whom it's critically
>>> important whether the first release with working Spark streaming will be
>>> 2.1.0 or 2.2.0, especially if we start cutting 2.2.0 very soon. This is
>>> speculation though
>>> - (subjective personal feeling) The release process requires participation
>>> and momentum from community members, and letting it drag on for too long
>>> loses that momentum.
>>> 
>>> We should anyway pursue resolving the issues asap, and users who were
>>> eagerly waiting for Spark streaming to work properly can run Beam at HEAD
>>> in the window between when they are first resolved and when 2.2.0 is
>>> released.
>>> 
>>> What do you think?
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 9:31 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 Another quick update.
 
 Aviem updated the Jira as he and his team wants to take a look. I'm also
 doing a
 new bisect on my side. I've given an extra day to move forward. If we
 don't have
 clear statement tonight, then, I will cut the RC3 tonight or tomorrow
 morning
 (my time).
 
 Regards
 JB
 
 On 08/05/2017 02:37 AM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:
> I did some more investigation on that JIRA
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 and my conclusion is:
> 
> We need to postpone that JIRA to 2.2.0 and finalize release 2.1.0
>>> as-is.
> 
> The TL;DR of my investigation is that:
> - We have some confidence that Spark runner in 2.1.0 generally works
> properly: it passes ValidatesRunner tests, and there's been some amount
 of
> manual testing.
> - Release 2.0.0 does not contain a critical fix and, if I understand
> correctly, Spark runner at 2.0.0 was basically unusable in streaming
> cluster mode.
> - So, even if the JIRA signals that there is something wrong in the
>>> Spark
> runner at 2.1.0, it's definitely better than 2.0.0 so there is no
> regression for the user.
> 
> I moved the JIRA to 2.2.0 so there are no blocking issues remaining for
> 2.1.0. JB - the next step is for you to proceed with cutting the RC,
> correct?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:04 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
 wrote:
> 
>> Another quick update. Regarding BEAM-2671, I asked help from Stas and
>> Aviem on
>> this one. It's our high priority as it's the main blocking issue
>>>