Contributor data in github-page no longer updated after May 1

[Yang,Jie(INF)]

Hi, teams

The contributors data in the following page seems no longer updated after May 
1,  Can anyone fix it?

https://github.com/apache/spark/graphs/contributors?from=2022-05-01&to=2022-05-11&type=c

Warm regards,
YangJie

Re: Contributor data in github-page no longer updated after May 1

[Hyukjin Kwon]

It's very likely a GitHub issue

On Wed, 11 May 2022 at 18:01, Yang,Jie(INF)  wrote:

> Hi, teams
>
>
>
> The contributors data in the following page seems no longer updated after
> May 1,  Can anyone fix it?
>
>
>
>
> https://github.com/apache/spark/graphs/contributors?from=2022-05-01&to=2022-05-11&type=c
>
>
>
> Warm regards,
>
> YangJie
>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Spark 3.3.0 (RC1)

[Maxim Gekk]

Hi All,

The vote has failed. I will create RC2 in a couple of days.

Maxim Gekk

Software Engineer

Databricks, Inc.


On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 4:23 AM Hyukjin Kwon  wrote:

> I expect to see RC2 too. I guess he just sticks to the standard, leaving
> the vote open till the end.
> It hasn't got enough +1s anyway :-).
>
> On Wed, 11 May 2022 at 10:17, Holden Karau  wrote:
>
>> Technically release don't follow vetos (see
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html ) it's up to the RM if
>> they get the minimum number of binding +1s (although they are encouraged to
>> cancel the release if any serious issues are raised).
>>
>> That being said I'll add my -1 based on the issues reported in this
>> thread.
>>
>> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 6:07 PM Sean Owen  wrote:
>>
>>> There's a -1 vote here, so I think this RC fails anyway.
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 10:30 AM Gengliang Wang  wrote:
>>>
 Hi Maxim,

 Thanks for the work!
 There is a bug fix from Bruce merged on branch-3.3 right after the RC1
 is cut:
 SPARK-39093: Dividing interval by integral can result in codegen
 compilation error
 

 So -1 from me. We should have RC2 to include the fix.

 Thanks
 Gengliang

 On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 6:15 PM Maxim Gekk
  wrote:

> Hi Dongjoon,
>
>  > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SPARK/versions/12350369
> > Since RC1 is started, could you move them out from the 3.3.0
> milestone?
>
> I have removed the 3.3.0 label from Fix version(s). Thank you,
> Dongjoon.
>
> Maxim Gekk
>
> Software Engineer
>
> Databricks, Inc.
>
>
> On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 11:06 AM Dongjoon Hyun 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi, Sean.
>> It's interesting. I didn't see those failures from my side.
>>
>> Hi, Maxim.
>> In the following link, there are 17 in-progress and 6 to-do JIRA
>> issues which look irrelevant to this RC1 vote.
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SPARK/versions/12350369
>>
>> Since RC1 is started, could you move them out from the 3.3.0
>> milestone?
>> Otherwise, we cannot distinguish new real blocker issues from those
>> obsolete JIRA issues.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dongjoon.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 11:46 AM Adam Binford 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I looked back at the first one (SPARK-37618), it expects/assumes a
>>> 0022 umask to correctly test the behavior. I'm not sure how to get that 
>>> to
>>> not fail or be ignored with a more open umask.
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 1:56 PM Sean Owen  wrote:
>>>
 I'm seeing test failures; is anyone seeing ones like this? This is
 Java 8 / Scala 2.12 / Ubuntu 22.04:

 - SPARK-37618: Sub dirs are group writable when removing from
 shuffle service enabled *** FAILED ***
   [OWNER_WRITE, GROUP_READ, GROUP_WRITE, GROUP_EXECUTE,
 OTHERS_READ, OWNER_READ, OTHERS_EXECUTE, OWNER_EXECUTE] contained
 GROUP_WRITE (DiskBlockManagerSuite.scala:155)

 - Check schemas for expression examples *** FAILED ***
   396 did not equal 398 Expected 396 blocks in result file but got
 398. Try regenerating the result files. 
 (ExpressionsSchemaSuite.scala:161)

  Function 'bloom_filter_agg', Expression class
 'org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.aggregate.BloomFilterAggregate'
 "" did not start with "
   Examples:
   " (ExpressionInfoSuite.scala:142)

 On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 6:01 AM Maxim Gekk
  wrote:

> Please vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache Spark
>  version 3.3.0.
>
> The vote is open until 11:59pm Pacific time May 10th and passes
> if a majority +1 PMC votes are cast, with a minimum of 3 +1 votes.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Spark 3.3.0
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ...
>
> To learn more about Apache Spark, please see http://spark
> .apache.org/
>
> The tag to be voted on is v3.3.0-rc1 (commit
> 482b7d54b522c4d1e25f3e84eabbc78126f22a3d):
> https://github.com/apache/spark/tree/v3.3.0-rc1
>
> The release files, including signatures, digests, etc. can be
> found at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/spark/v3.3.0-rc1-bin/
>
> Signatures used for Spark RCs can be found in this file:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/spark/KEYS
>
> The staging repository for this release can be found at:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachespark-1402
>
> The documentation corresponding to this release can be

Re: [VOTE] Release Spark 3.3.0 (RC1)

[Holden Karau]

Do we have everything we want for RC2 targeted to 3.3.0 for tracking?

On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 6:44 AM Maxim Gekk
 wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> The vote has failed. I will create RC2 in a couple of days.
>
> Maxim Gekk
>
> Software Engineer
>
> Databricks, Inc.
>
>
> On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 4:23 AM Hyukjin Kwon  wrote:
>
>> I expect to see RC2 too. I guess he just sticks to the standard, leaving
>> the vote open till the end.
>> It hasn't got enough +1s anyway :-).
>>
>> On Wed, 11 May 2022 at 10:17, Holden Karau  wrote:
>>
>>> Technically release don't follow vetos (see
>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html ) it's up to the RM if
>>> they get the minimum number of binding +1s (although they are encouraged to
>>> cancel the release if any serious issues are raised).
>>>
>>> That being said I'll add my -1 based on the issues reported in this
>>> thread.
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 6:07 PM Sean Owen  wrote:
>>>
 There's a -1 vote here, so I think this RC fails anyway.

 On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 10:30 AM Gengliang Wang 
 wrote:

> Hi Maxim,
>
> Thanks for the work!
> There is a bug fix from Bruce merged on branch-3.3 right after the RC1
> is cut:
> SPARK-39093: Dividing interval by integral can result in codegen
> compilation error
> 
>
> So -1 from me. We should have RC2 to include the fix.
>
> Thanks
> Gengliang
>
> On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 6:15 PM Maxim Gekk
>  wrote:
>
>> Hi Dongjoon,
>>
>>  > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SPARK/versions/12350369
>> > Since RC1 is started, could you move them out from the 3.3.0
>> milestone?
>>
>> I have removed the 3.3.0 label from Fix version(s). Thank you,
>> Dongjoon.
>>
>> Maxim Gekk
>>
>> Software Engineer
>>
>> Databricks, Inc.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 11:06 AM Dongjoon Hyun <
>> dongjoon.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, Sean.
>>> It's interesting. I didn't see those failures from my side.
>>>
>>> Hi, Maxim.
>>> In the following link, there are 17 in-progress and 6 to-do JIRA
>>> issues which look irrelevant to this RC1 vote.
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SPARK/versions/12350369
>>>
>>> Since RC1 is started, could you move them out from the 3.3.0
>>> milestone?
>>> Otherwise, we cannot distinguish new real blocker issues from those
>>> obsolete JIRA issues.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Dongjoon.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 11:46 AM Adam Binford 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I looked back at the first one (SPARK-37618), it expects/assumes a
 0022 umask to correctly test the behavior. I'm not sure how to get 
 that to
 not fail or be ignored with a more open umask.

 On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 1:56 PM Sean Owen  wrote:

> I'm seeing test failures; is anyone seeing ones like this? This is
> Java 8 / Scala 2.12 / Ubuntu 22.04:
>
> - SPARK-37618: Sub dirs are group writable when removing from
> shuffle service enabled *** FAILED ***
>   [OWNER_WRITE, GROUP_READ, GROUP_WRITE, GROUP_EXECUTE,
> OTHERS_READ, OWNER_READ, OTHERS_EXECUTE, OWNER_EXECUTE] contained
> GROUP_WRITE (DiskBlockManagerSuite.scala:155)
>
> - Check schemas for expression examples *** FAILED ***
>   396 did not equal 398 Expected 396 blocks in result file but got
> 398. Try regenerating the result files. 
> (ExpressionsSchemaSuite.scala:161)
>
>  Function 'bloom_filter_agg', Expression class
> 'org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.aggregate.BloomFilterAggregate'
> "" did not start with "
>   Examples:
>   " (ExpressionInfoSuite.scala:142)
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 6:01 AM Maxim Gekk
>  wrote:
>
>> Please vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache Spark
>>  version 3.3.0.
>>
>> The vote is open until 11:59pm Pacific time May 10th and passes
>> if a majority +1 PMC votes are cast, with a minimum of 3 +1 votes
>> .
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Spark 3.3.0
>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ...
>>
>> To learn more about Apache Spark, please see http://spark
>> .apache.org/
>>
>> The tag to be voted on is v3.3.0-rc1 (commit
>> 482b7d54b522c4d1e25f3e84eabbc78126f22a3d):
>> https://github.com/apache/spark/tree/v3.3.0-rc1
>>
>> The release files, including signatures, digests, etc. can be
>> found at:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/spark/v3.3.0-rc1-bin/
>>
>> Signatures used for Spark RCs can be found in 

Re: [VOTE] Release Spark 3.3.0 (RC1)

[Dongjoon Hyun]

Actually, I want to add this for discussion because there were many
concerns about the new Kafka 3.1 client.

https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/36517
Revert "[SPARK-36837][BUILD] Upgrade Kafka to 3.1.0"

Dongjoon.


On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 7:55 AM Holden Karau  wrote:

> Do we have everything we want for RC2 targeted to 3.3.0 for tracking?
>
> On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 6:44 AM Maxim Gekk
>  wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> The vote has failed. I will create RC2 in a couple of days.
>>
>> Maxim Gekk
>>
>> Software Engineer
>>
>> Databricks, Inc.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 4:23 AM Hyukjin Kwon  wrote:
>>
>>> I expect to see RC2 too. I guess he just sticks to the standard, leaving
>>> the vote open till the end.
>>> It hasn't got enough +1s anyway :-).
>>>
>>> On Wed, 11 May 2022 at 10:17, Holden Karau  wrote:
>>>
 Technically release don't follow vetos (see
 https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html ) it's up to the RM if
 they get the minimum number of binding +1s (although they are encouraged to
 cancel the release if any serious issues are raised).

 That being said I'll add my -1 based on the issues reported in this
 thread.

 On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 6:07 PM Sean Owen  wrote:

> There's a -1 vote here, so I think this RC fails anyway.
>
> On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 10:30 AM Gengliang Wang 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Maxim,
>>
>> Thanks for the work!
>> There is a bug fix from Bruce merged on branch-3.3 right after the
>> RC1 is cut:
>> SPARK-39093: Dividing interval by integral can result in codegen
>> compilation error
>> 
>>
>> So -1 from me. We should have RC2 to include the fix.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Gengliang
>>
>> On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 6:15 PM Maxim Gekk
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dongjoon,
>>>
>>>  > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SPARK/versions/12350369
>>> > Since RC1 is started, could you move them out from the 3.3.0
>>> milestone?
>>>
>>> I have removed the 3.3.0 label from Fix version(s). Thank you,
>>> Dongjoon.
>>>
>>> Maxim Gekk
>>>
>>> Software Engineer
>>>
>>> Databricks, Inc.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 11:06 AM Dongjoon Hyun <
>>> dongjoon.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi, Sean.
 It's interesting. I didn't see those failures from my side.

 Hi, Maxim.
 In the following link, there are 17 in-progress and 6 to-do JIRA
 issues which look irrelevant to this RC1 vote.

 https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SPARK/versions/12350369

 Since RC1 is started, could you move them out from the 3.3.0
 milestone?
 Otherwise, we cannot distinguish new real blocker issues from those
 obsolete JIRA issues.

 Thanks,
 Dongjoon.


 On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 11:46 AM Adam Binford 
 wrote:

> I looked back at the first one (SPARK-37618), it expects/assumes a
> 0022 umask to correctly test the behavior. I'm not sure how to get 
> that to
> not fail or be ignored with a more open umask.
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 1:56 PM Sean Owen  wrote:
>
>> I'm seeing test failures; is anyone seeing ones like this? This
>> is Java 8 / Scala 2.12 / Ubuntu 22.04:
>>
>> - SPARK-37618: Sub dirs are group writable when removing from
>> shuffle service enabled *** FAILED ***
>>   [OWNER_WRITE, GROUP_READ, GROUP_WRITE, GROUP_EXECUTE,
>> OTHERS_READ, OWNER_READ, OTHERS_EXECUTE, OWNER_EXECUTE] contained
>> GROUP_WRITE (DiskBlockManagerSuite.scala:155)
>>
>> - Check schemas for expression examples *** FAILED ***
>>   396 did not equal 398 Expected 396 blocks in result file but
>> got 398. Try regenerating the result files.
>> (ExpressionsSchemaSuite.scala:161)
>>
>>  Function 'bloom_filter_agg', Expression class
>> 'org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.aggregate.BloomFilterAggregate'
>> "" did not start with "
>>   Examples:
>>   " (ExpressionInfoSuite.scala:142)
>>
>> On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 6:01 AM Maxim Gekk
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Please vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache Spark
>>>  version 3.3.0.
>>>
>>> The vote is open until 11:59pm Pacific time May 10th and passes
>>> if a majority +1 PMC votes are cast, with a minimum of 3 +1
>>> votes.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Spark 3.3.0
>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ...
>>>
>>> To learn more about Apache Spark, please see http://spark
>>> .apache.org/
>>>
>