Re: Subject: [VOTE][RESULT] Storm 2.6.3 Release Candidate 1

[Richard Zowalla]

FYI: I just opened the PR to get the new version on Docker

> Am 22.07.2024 um 16:11 schrieb Rui Abreu :
> 
> Storm 2.6.3 RC-1 was approved for release with 3 binding +1.
> 
> Storm 2.6.3 release artifacts are available in Maven Central Repository.
> 
> Release is available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3
> Release notes are here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> Also see: https://storm.apache.org for updated information on this 2.6.3
> and prior releases.
> 
> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.

Re: Subject: [VOTE][RESULT] Storm 2.6.3 Release Candidate 1

[Richard Zowalla]

We need to update the website and send the announce (in plain text) to 
annou...@apache.org 

If you need any help with it, just ping me ;-)



> Am 22.07.2024 um 16:11 schrieb Rui Abreu :
> 
> Storm 2.6.3 RC-1 was approved for release with 3 binding +1.
> 
> Storm 2.6.3 release artifacts are available in Maven Central Repository.
> 
> Release is available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3
> Release notes are here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> Also see: https://storm.apache.org for updated information on this 2.6.3
> and prior releases.
> 
> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 2.6.3 (rc1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Yep. You can send the VOTE RESULT Mail and proceed ;-)

Am 22. Juli 2024 14:39:58 MESZ schrieb Rui Abreu :
>No worries, I'll do it and will also update the docs.
>After that, if you concur, I'll start the release procedure since we now
>have 3 binding votes.
>
>On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 at 13:36, Richard Zowalla  wrote:
>
>> I would use sha512sum (as it's done in other ASF Projects as well). We
>> should update the docs.
>>
>> Am 22. Juli 2024 14:09:53 MESZ schrieb Rui Abreu :
>> >Hi Julien,
>> >
>> >Thanks for taking the time to review the release.
>> >
>> >The difference in the checksum comes down to the binaries that were used
>> to
>> >generate them. Source archives are using sha512sum whereas final packages
>> >are using gpg --print-md.
>> >
>> > According to the release procedures:
>> >
>> >pushd storm-dist/source/target
>> >sha512sum apache-storm-2.6.0-src.zip > apache-storm-2.6.0-src.zip.sha512
>> >sha512sum apache-storm-2.6.0-src.tar.gz >
>> >apache-storm-2.6.0-src.tar.gz.sha512popd
>> >pushd storm-dist/binary/final-package/target
>> >gpg --print-md SHA512 apache-storm-2.6.0.zip >
>> apache-storm-2.6.0.zip.sha512
>> >gpg --print-md SHA512 apache-storm-2.6.0.tar.gz >
>> >apache-storm-2.6.0.tar.gz.sha512pop
>> >
>> >
>> >Happy to fix this if the procedure is wrong.
>> >
>> >On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 at 08:34, Julien Nioche <
>> lists.digitalpeb...@gmail.com>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> Thanks for taking care of the release Rui.
>> >>
>> >> The signatures  apache-storm-2.6.3.tar.gz.sha512
>> >> <
>> >>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/apache-storm-2.6.3.tar.gz.sha512
>> >> >
>> >> and apache-storm-2.6.3.zip.sha512
>> >> <
>> >>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/apache-storm-2.6.3.zip.sha512
>> >> >
>> >> are
>> >> not at the same format as the others. Can you please check that they are
>> >> correct and replace them if needed?
>> >>
>> >> Apart from that, +1 from me
>> >>
>> >>- checked the other signatures
>> >>- created a distribution from source
>> >>- used it to run a local topology
>> >>- ran a distributed cluster
>> >>
>> >> Thanks!
>> >>
>> >> Julien
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 at 16:42, Rui Abreu  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Hi folks,
>> >> >
>> >> > I have posted a 1st release candidate for the Apache Storm 2.6.3
>> release
>> >> > and it is ready for testing.
>> >> >
>> >> > The Nexus staging repository is here:
>> >> >
>> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1112
>> >> >
>> >> > Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are here:
>> >> >
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/
>> >> > The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> http://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?search=rabreu=on=index
>> >> > in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
>> >> >
>> >> > The release was made from the Apache Storm 2.6.3 tag at:
>> >> > https://github.com/apache/storm/tree/v2.6.3
>> >> >
>> >> > Full list of changes in this release:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>> >> >
>> >> > To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.3 and add
>> the
>> >> > following URL to your settings.xml file:
>> >> >
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1112
>> >> >
>> >> > The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on
>> the
>> >> > GitHub repository:
>> >> > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md
>> >> >
>> >> > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.3. The
>> vote
>> >> is
>> >> > open for at least the next 72 hours.
>> >> > "How to vote" is described here:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
>> >> > When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
>> >> >
>> >> > Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
>> >> check
>> >> > the release candidate and vote.
>> >> > The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
>> >> >
>> >> > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm [VERSION]
>> >> > [ ]  0 No opinion
>> >> > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks!
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> *Julien Nioche *
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> digitalpebble.com <http://www.digitalpebble.com/>
>> >>
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 2.6.3 (rc1)

[Richard Zowalla]

I would use sha512sum (as it's done in other ASF Projects as well). We should 
update the docs.

Am 22. Juli 2024 14:09:53 MESZ schrieb Rui Abreu :
>Hi Julien,
>
>Thanks for taking the time to review the release.
>
>The difference in the checksum comes down to the binaries that were used to
>generate them. Source archives are using sha512sum whereas final packages
>are using gpg --print-md.
>
> According to the release procedures:
>
>pushd storm-dist/source/target
>sha512sum apache-storm-2.6.0-src.zip > apache-storm-2.6.0-src.zip.sha512
>sha512sum apache-storm-2.6.0-src.tar.gz >
>apache-storm-2.6.0-src.tar.gz.sha512popd
>pushd storm-dist/binary/final-package/target
>gpg --print-md SHA512 apache-storm-2.6.0.zip > apache-storm-2.6.0.zip.sha512
>gpg --print-md SHA512 apache-storm-2.6.0.tar.gz >
>apache-storm-2.6.0.tar.gz.sha512pop
>
>
>Happy to fix this if the procedure is wrong.
>
>On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 at 08:34, Julien Nioche 
>wrote:
>
>> Thanks for taking care of the release Rui.
>>
>> The signatures  apache-storm-2.6.3.tar.gz.sha512
>> <
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/apache-storm-2.6.3.tar.gz.sha512
>> >
>> and apache-storm-2.6.3.zip.sha512
>> <
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/apache-storm-2.6.3.zip.sha512
>> >
>> are
>> not at the same format as the others. Can you please check that they are
>> correct and replace them if needed?
>>
>> Apart from that, +1 from me
>>
>>- checked the other signatures
>>- created a distribution from source
>>- used it to run a local topology
>>- ran a distributed cluster
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Julien
>>
>> On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 at 16:42, Rui Abreu  wrote:
>>
>> > Hi folks,
>> >
>> > I have posted a 1st release candidate for the Apache Storm 2.6.3 release
>> > and it is ready for testing.
>> >
>> > The Nexus staging repository is here:
>> >
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1112
>> >
>> > Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are here:
>> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/
>> > The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> http://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?search=rabreu=on=index
>> > in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
>> >
>> > The release was made from the Apache Storm 2.6.3 tag at:
>> > https://github.com/apache/storm/tree/v2.6.3
>> >
>> > Full list of changes in this release:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>> >
>> > To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.3 and add the
>> > following URL to your settings.xml file:
>> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1112
>> >
>> > The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on the
>> > GitHub repository:
>> > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md
>> >
>> > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.3. The vote
>> is
>> > open for at least the next 72 hours.
>> > "How to vote" is described here:
>> >
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
>> > When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
>> >
>> > Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
>> check
>> > the release candidate and vote.
>> > The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
>> >
>> > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm [VERSION]
>> > [ ]  0 No opinion
>> > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>> >
>> > Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Julien Nioche *
>>
>>
>> digitalpebble.com 
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 2.6.3 (rc1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Can we get some more binding votes here?

Am 16. Juli 2024 17:41:56 MESZ schrieb Rui Abreu :
>Hi folks,
>
>I have posted a 1st release candidate for the Apache Storm 2.6.3 release
>and it is ready for testing.
>
>The Nexus staging repository is here:
>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1112
>
>Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are here:
>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/
>The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>
>http://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?search=rabreu=on=index
>in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
>
>The release was made from the Apache Storm 2.6.3 tag at:
>https://github.com/apache/storm/tree/v2.6.3
>
>Full list of changes in this release:
>
>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>
>To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.3 and add the
>following URL to your settings.xml file:
>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1112
>
>The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on the
>GitHub repository:
>https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md
>
>Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.3. The vote is
>open for at least the next 72 hours.
>"How to vote" is described here:
>https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
>When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
>
>Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to check
>the release candidate and vote.
>The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
>
>[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm [VERSION]
>[ ]  0 No opinion
>[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
>Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
>
>Thanks!

Re: New release?

[Richard Zowalla]

All good for me ;-)

Next funny part (after the vote succeeds) will be to build the website ;-)
Might be a challenge too.

In StormCrawler we build the website in a docker environment to avoid spoiling 
our systems with ruby gems.
Here it is https://github.com/apache/incubator-stormcrawler-site/tree/main

Might also be a contribution to port such an approach to Storm, so we don’t 
need the local environment (or even add the same approach for build with GH 
actions as we do it there).

Gruß
Richard



> Am 18.07.2024 um 15:52 schrieb Rui Abreu :
> 
> Hi again,
> 
> I took the liberty of updating
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md with some of the
> not so obvious problems I had when generating the binaries and uploading
> the artifacts.
> I would like to apologize for doing this in 4 commits instead of one, I
> mistakenly commit to the main repo instead of my own fork. The intention
> was to open a PR.
> Let me know if there is something you want me to change.
> 
> On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 at 10:51, Richard Zowalla  wrote:
> 
>> Take your time :-)
>> Happy to see others moving forward as release manager.
>> 
>> Am 16. Juli 2024 11:43:21 MESZ schrieb Rui Abreu :
>>> Hello Richard,
>>> 
>>> Apologies for the delay, got sidetracked.
>>> I'm making my way through the checklist and have been having some problems
>>> compiling and generating the binaries locally, mostly with OS related
>>> issues. But I'm making progress.
>>> I will add some extra notes to the release procedure noting hidden
>>> obstacles that I've encountered so far.
>>> I will update this thread by the end of the day. If I haven't made
>>> progress, I will kindly ask you to perform the release in the interest of
>>> not delay it it anymore.
>>> Thank you
>>> 
>>> On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 at 09:09, Richard Zowalla  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Any luck with it?
>>>> 
>>>>> Am 12.07.2024 um 22:03 schrieb Rui Abreu :
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'll give it a try and report back.
>>>>> Thank you
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2024, 16:32 Richard Zowalla 
>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> If you want to give a try as release manager, feel free. The process
>> is
>>>>>> okish documented.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Otherwise, I might be able to do it next week.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Am 12. Juli 2024 17:25:13 MESZ schrieb Rui Abreu <
>> rui.ab...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>> Should we kick off the vote?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2024, 07:59 Julien Nioche <
>>>> lists.digitalpeb...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Good idea!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 1 Jul 2024 at 09:15, Rui Abreu 
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I agree with the release.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 1 Jul 2024 at 07:20, Richard Zowalla 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> We had a few fixes and updates since our last release.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Any objections for doing a new release soon?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Gruß
>>>>>>>>>> Richard
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> *Julien Nioche *
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> digitalpebble.com <http://www.digitalpebble.com/>
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 2.6.3 (rc1)

[Richard Zowalla]

By ASF rules, we need 3 binding votes from the PMC.
You will need to vote yourself in a mail to this thread, because there are no 
implicit votes by ASF policies.

The vote needs to be open as long as it takes to have 3 binding PMC votes.

Gruß
Richard

> Am 18.07.2024 um 11:23 schrieb Rui Abreu :
> 
> Richard, assuming we don't have more votes, are you happy to proceed with
> the release by the end of tomorrow ?
> 
> On Wed, 17 Jul 2024 at 13:08, Richard Zowalla  wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> thanks for the release.
>> 
>> Here is my vote:
>> 
>> - Checked sigs for source and binary
>> - Build locally
>> - Run a StormCrawler topology on docker / k8s
>> 
>> +1 (binding)
>> 
>> Gruß
>> Richard
>> 
>> On 2024/07/16 15:41:56 Rui Abreu wrote:
>>> Hi folks,
>>> 
>>> I have posted a 1st release candidate for the Apache Storm 2.6.3 release
>>> and it is ready for testing.
>>> 
>>> The Nexus staging repository is here:
>>> 
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1112
>>> 
>>> Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are here:
>>>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/
>>> The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>>> 
>>> 
>> http://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?search=rabreu=on=index
>>>in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
>>> 
>>> The release was made from the Apache Storm 2.6.3 tag at:
>>>https://github.com/apache/storm/tree/v2.6.3
>>> 
>>> Full list of changes in this release:
>>> 
>>> 
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>>> 
>>> To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.3 and add the
>>> following URL to your settings.xml file:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1112
>>> 
>>> The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on the
>>> GitHub repository:
>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md
>>> 
>>> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.3. The vote
>> is
>>> open for at least the next 72 hours.
>>> "How to vote" is described here:
>>> 
>> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
>>> When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
>>> 
>>> Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
>> check
>>> the release candidate and vote.
>>> The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
>>> 
>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm [VERSION]
>>> [ ]  0 No opinion
>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>> 
>>> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
>>> 
>>> Thanks!
>>> 
>> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 2.6.3 (rc1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi,

thanks for the release.

Here is my vote:

- Checked sigs for source and binary
- Build locally 
- Run a StormCrawler topology on docker / k8s 

+1 (binding)

Gruß
Richard

On 2024/07/16 15:41:56 Rui Abreu wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> I have posted a 1st release candidate for the Apache Storm 2.6.3 release
> and it is ready for testing.
> 
> The Nexus staging repository is here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1112
> 
> Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/
> The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
> 
> http://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?search=rabreu=on=index
> in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
> 
> The release was made from the Apache Storm 2.6.3 tag at:
> https://github.com/apache/storm/tree/v2.6.3
> 
> Full list of changes in this release:
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> 
> To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.3 and add the
> following URL to your settings.xml file:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1112
> 
> The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on the
> GitHub repository:
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md
> 
> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.3. The vote is
> open for at least the next 72 hours.
> "How to vote" is described here:
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
> When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
> 
> Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to check
> the release candidate and vote.
> The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
> 
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm [VERSION]
> [ ]  0 No opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> 
> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> 
> Thanks!
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 2.6.3 (rc1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Thanks for preparation!

Two things before checking in detail:

Can you close the staging repo? Otherwise, artifacts cannot be retrieved (see 
message If you click on the link)

Can you upload ASC signatures to the dist/Dev area? They are currently missing.

Gruß 
Richard 

Am 16. Juli 2024 17:41:56 MESZ schrieb Rui Abreu :
>Hi folks,
>
>I have posted a 1st release candidate for the Apache Storm 2.6.3 release
>and it is ready for testing.
>
>The Nexus staging repository is here:
>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1112
>
>Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are here:
>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/
>The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>
>http://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?search=rabreu=on=index
>in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
>
>The release was made from the Apache Storm 2.6.3 tag at:
>https://github.com/apache/storm/tree/v2.6.3
>
>Full list of changes in this release:
>
>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.3-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>
>To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.3 and add the
>following URL to your settings.xml file:
>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1112
>
>The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on the
>GitHub repository:
>https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md
>
>Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.3. The vote is
>open for at least the next 72 hours.
>"How to vote" is described here:
>https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
>When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
>
>Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to check
>the release candidate and vote.
>The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
>
>[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm [VERSION]
>[ ]  0 No opinion
>[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
>Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
>
>Thanks!

Re: New release?

[Richard Zowalla]

Take your time :-)
Happy to see others moving forward as release manager.

Am 16. Juli 2024 11:43:21 MESZ schrieb Rui Abreu :
>Hello Richard,
>
>Apologies for the delay, got sidetracked.
>I'm making my way through the checklist and have been having some problems
>compiling and generating the binaries locally, mostly with OS related
>issues. But I'm making progress.
>I will add some extra notes to the release procedure noting hidden
>obstacles that I've encountered so far.
>I will update this thread by the end of the day. If I haven't made
>progress, I will kindly ask you to perform the release in the interest of
>not delay it it anymore.
>Thank you
>
>On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 at 09:09, Richard Zowalla  wrote:
>
>> Any luck with it?
>>
>> > Am 12.07.2024 um 22:03 schrieb Rui Abreu :
>> >
>> > I'll give it a try and report back.
>> > Thank you
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jul 12, 2024, 16:32 Richard Zowalla  wrote:
>> >
>> >> If you want to give a try as release manager, feel free. The process is
>> >> okish documented.
>> >>
>> >> Otherwise, I might be able to do it next week.
>> >>
>> >> Am 12. Juli 2024 17:25:13 MESZ schrieb Rui Abreu :
>> >>> Should we kick off the vote?
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2024, 07:59 Julien Nioche <
>> lists.digitalpeb...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Good idea!
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Mon, 1 Jul 2024 at 09:15, Rui Abreu  wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> I agree with the release.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Mon, 1 Jul 2024 at 07:20, Richard Zowalla 
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Hi all,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> We had a few fixes and updates since our last release.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Any objections for doing a new release soon?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Gruß
>> >>>>>> Richard
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> *Julien Nioche *
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> digitalpebble.com <http://www.digitalpebble.com/>
>> >>>>
>> >>
>>
>>

Re: New release?

[Richard Zowalla]

Any luck with it?

> Am 12.07.2024 um 22:03 schrieb Rui Abreu :
> 
> I'll give it a try and report back.
> Thank you
> 
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2024, 16:32 Richard Zowalla  wrote:
> 
>> If you want to give a try as release manager, feel free. The process is
>> okish documented.
>> 
>> Otherwise, I might be able to do it next week.
>> 
>> Am 12. Juli 2024 17:25:13 MESZ schrieb Rui Abreu :
>>> Should we kick off the vote?
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2024, 07:59 Julien Nioche 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Good idea!
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, 1 Jul 2024 at 09:15, Rui Abreu  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I agree with the release.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, 1 Jul 2024 at 07:20, Richard Zowalla  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We had a few fixes and updates since our last release.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Any objections for doing a new release soon?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Gruß
>>>>>> Richard
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> *Julien Nioche *
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> digitalpebble.com <http://www.digitalpebble.com/>
>>>> 
>> 

Re: New release?

[Richard Zowalla]

Great!

Docs are here:

https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md

I would use a branch for preparation to avoid spoiling master/main of we need 
to re-roll with revert commits.

KEYS file is here for your key to add (via SVN):

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/

Feel free to ask anything you might get caught up with.

Gruß 
Richard 



Am 12. Juli 2024 22:03:32 MESZ schrieb Rui Abreu :
>I'll give it a try and report back.
>Thank you
>
>On Fri, Jul 12, 2024, 16:32 Richard Zowalla  wrote:
>
>> If you want to give a try as release manager, feel free. The process is
>> okish documented.
>>
>> Otherwise, I might be able to do it next week.
>>
>> Am 12. Juli 2024 17:25:13 MESZ schrieb Rui Abreu :
>> >Should we kick off the vote?
>> >
>> >On Wed, Jul 3, 2024, 07:59 Julien Nioche 
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> Good idea!
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, 1 Jul 2024 at 09:15, Rui Abreu  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I agree with the release.
>> >> >
>> >> > On Mon, 1 Jul 2024 at 07:20, Richard Zowalla  wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Hi all,
>> >> > >
>> >> > > We had a few fixes and updates since our last release.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Any objections for doing a new release soon?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Gruß
>> >> > > Richard
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> *Julien Nioche *
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> digitalpebble.com <http://www.digitalpebble.com/>
>> >>
>>

Re: New release?

[Richard Zowalla]

If you want to give a try as release manager, feel free. The process is okish 
documented.

Otherwise, I might be able to do it next week.

Am 12. Juli 2024 17:25:13 MESZ schrieb Rui Abreu :
>Should we kick off the vote?
>
>On Wed, Jul 3, 2024, 07:59 Julien Nioche 
>wrote:
>
>> Good idea!
>>
>> On Mon, 1 Jul 2024 at 09:15, Rui Abreu  wrote:
>>
>> > I agree with the release.
>> >
>> > On Mon, 1 Jul 2024 at 07:20, Richard Zowalla  wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi all,
>> > >
>> > > We had a few fixes and updates since our last release.
>> > >
>> > > Any objections for doing a new release soon?
>> > >
>> > > Gruß
>> > > Richard
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Julien Nioche *
>>
>>
>> digitalpebble.com <http://www.digitalpebble.com/>
>>

Re: Licensing of the Redis Module

[Richard Zowalla]

lol :) yes you are right. 
As long it stays MIT, we can still rely on it but might be worth
looking to the clients for the fork because people might migrate sooner
or later (similar to elastic search and opensearch)

In this case: sorry for the noise and thanks Alexandre for the heads up
;-)

Am Montag, dem 13.05.2024 um 13:25 +0200 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Hello,
> 
> Yes Redis server licensing became non-OSS friendly, but I don't
> understand what would be Storm's dependency on Redis server : don't
> we
> we just need a Redis client, such as Jedis (this later has a MIT
> License) ?
> 
> Alex
> 
> Le lun. 13 mai 2024 à 11:51, Richard Zowalla  a
> écrit :
> > 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > REDIS switched it's license, which isn't compatible anymore [1]
> > 
> > We have two options here (imho):
> > 
> > (1) Drop the REDIS module
> > (2) Migrate to the OSS fork: https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey
> > 
> > 
> > WDYT?
> > 
> > Gruß
> > Richard
> > 
> > [1]
> > https://redis.io/blog/redis-adopts-dual-source-available-licensing/

Licensing of the Redis Module

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

REDIS switched it's license, which isn't compatible anymore [1]

We have two options here (imho):

(1) Drop the REDIS module
(2) Migrate to the OSS fork: https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey


WDYT?

Gruß
Richard

[1] https://redis.io/blog/redis-adopts-dual-source-available-licensing/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [RESULT] Move Storm from JIRA to GitHub issues

[Richard Zowalla]

Thanks. I added a comment. Maybe they pick it up or we can do some steps 
ourselves.

Am 11. April 2024 17:52:05 MESZ schrieb Julien Nioche 
:
>No progress on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-25574 from infra.
>Any suggestions on how to proceed?
>
>On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 at 13:26, Richard Zowalla  wrote:
>
>> did we get any updates on the related jira? Or does it hang @ infra?
>>
>> Gruß
>> Richard
>>
>> Am Samstag, dem 02.03.2024 um 10:20 + schrieb Julien Nioche:
>> > The vote passes with 4 +1
>> >
>> > Thanks for taking part. Let's get things in motion next week
>> >
>> > Julien
>> >
>> > On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 at 13:20, Kishor Patil
>> > 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > +1
>> > >
>> > > Best regards,
>> > > Kishor Patil
>> > >
>> > > > On Feb 28, 2024, at 4:37 PM, Bipin Prasad
>> > > > 
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >  +1
>> > > >On Wednesday, February 28, 2024 at 02:42:21 PM CST, Richard
>> > > > Zowalla <
>> > > r...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > +1
>> > > >
>> > > > > Am Mittwoch, dem 28.02.2024 um 09:08 + schrieb Julien
>> > > > > Nioche:
>> > > > > Hi,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Following the discussion initiated by Richard [1], please vote
>> > > > > on
>> > > > > moving
>> > > > > Storm from JIRA to GitHub issues
>> > > > >
>> > > > > The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as
>> > > > > needed.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > [ ] +1 Move Storm from JIRA to GitHub issues
>> > > > > [ ]  0 No opinion
>> > > > > [ ] -1 Keep the issues on JIRA
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Here is my +1
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Thanks
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Julien
>> > > > >
>> > > > > [1]
>> > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/ty80h0kqfh2r7vh6wmzmhzh07njbq0jn
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>-- 
>*Julien Nioche *
>
>
>digitalpebble.com <http://www.digitalpebble.com/>

Re: [RESULT] Move Storm from JIRA to GitHub issues

[Richard Zowalla]

did we get any updates on the related jira? Or does it hang @ infra?

Gruß
Richard

Am Samstag, dem 02.03.2024 um 10:20 + schrieb Julien Nioche:
> The vote passes with 4 +1
> 
> Thanks for taking part. Let's get things in motion next week
> 
> Julien
> 
> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 at 13:20, Kishor Patil
> 
> wrote:
> 
> > +1
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Kishor Patil
> > 
> > > On Feb 28, 2024, at 4:37 PM, Bipin Prasad
> > > 
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > >  +1
> > >    On Wednesday, February 28, 2024 at 02:42:21 PM CST, Richard
> > > Zowalla <
> > r...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > +1
> > > 
> > > > Am Mittwoch, dem 28.02.2024 um 09:08 + schrieb Julien
> > > > Nioche:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > Following the discussion initiated by Richard [1], please vote
> > > > on
> > > > moving
> > > > Storm from JIRA to GitHub issues
> > > > 
> > > > The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as
> > > > needed.
> > > > 
> > > > [ ] +1 Move Storm from JIRA to GitHub issues
> > > > [ ]  0 No opinion
> > > > [ ] -1 Keep the issues on JIRA
> > > > 
> > > > Here is my +1
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks
> > > > 
> > > > Julien
> > > > 
> > > > [1]
> > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/ty80h0kqfh2r7vh6wmzmhzh07njbq0jn
> > > 
> > 
> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Storm 2.6.2 Released

[Richard Zowalla]

The Apache Storm community is pleased to announce the release of Apache
Storm version 2.6.2.

Apache Storm is a distributed, fault-tolerant, and high-performance
realtime computation system that provides strong guarantees on the
processing of data. You can read more about Apache Storm on the project
website:

https://storm.apache.org/

Downloads of source and binary distributions are listed in our download
section:

https://storm.apache.org/downloads.html

You can read more about this release in the following blog post:

https://storm.apache.org/2024/04/05/storm262-released.html

Distribution artifacts are available in Maven Central at the following
coordinates:

groupId: org.apache.storm
artifactId: storm-{component}
version: 2.6.2

The full list of changes is available here [1]. Please let us know [2]
if you encounter any problems.

Regards,
The Apache Storm Team

[1] https://downloads.apache.org/storm/apache-storm-2.6.2/RELEASE_NOTES.html
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM

[RESULT] [VOTE] Apache Storm 2.6.2 (rc1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi,

this vote passes with the following votes:

+1 Julien Nioche (binding)
+1 Alexandre Vermeerbergen (binding)
+1 Richard Zowalla (binding)

I'll proceed with the steps. Thx for your time!

Gruß
Richard

Re: [VOTE] Apache Storm 2.6.2 (rc1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Here is my own +1 (binding)

Am Dienstag, dem 02.04.2024 um 10:32 +0200 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> Hi all,
> 
> I have posted a first release candidate for Apache Storm 2.6.2 and it
> is ready for testing.
> 
> We upgraded libraries and pruned some dependencies which came in as
> transient dependencies.
> 
> Full list of changes in this release:
>   
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.2-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> 
> 
> The Nexus staging repository is here:
> 
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-/
> 
> Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are here:
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.2-rc1/
>    
> The release artifacts are signed with my key contained in this file:
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/KEYS
> 
> The release was made from the Apache Storm v2.6.2 tag at:
> 
> https://github.com/apache/storm/releases/tag/v2.6.2
> 
> 
> To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.2 and add
> the following to your POM:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> storm-2.6.2-rc1
> Testing Storm 2.6.2 RC1 
> 
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-
> /
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on
> the
> GitHub repository:
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md
> 
> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.2.
> 
> The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed.
> 
> "How to vote" is described here:
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
> 
> When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
> 
> Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
> check the release candidate and vote.
> 
> The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
> 
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.6.2
> [ ]  0 No opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> 
> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Richard
> 
> 

[VOTE] Apache Storm 2.6.2 (rc1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

I have posted a first release candidate for Apache Storm 2.6.2 and it
is ready for testing.

We upgraded libraries and pruned some dependencies which came in as
transient dependencies.

Full list of changes in this release:
  
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.2-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html


The Nexus staging repository is here:

https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-/

Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are here:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.2-rc1/
   
The release artifacts are signed with my key contained in this file:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/KEYS

The release was made from the Apache Storm v2.6.2 tag at:

https://github.com/apache/storm/releases/tag/v2.6.2


To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.2 and add
the following to your POM:




storm-2.6.2-rc1
Testing Storm 2.6.2 RC1 
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-/






The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on the
GitHub repository:
https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md

Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.2.

The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed.

"How to vote" is described here:
https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate

When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.

Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
check the release candidate and vote.

The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.

[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.6.2
[ ]  0 No opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...

Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.

Thanks!

Richard

[DISCUSS] Release 2.6.2 ?

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi,

any objections in doing a 2.6.2 after eastern?

We have some CVE fixes, so might be worth making a small update?

WDYT?

Best
Richard

Re: [VOTE] Move Storm from JIRA to GitHub issues

[Richard Zowalla]

+1

Am Mittwoch, dem 28.02.2024 um 09:08 + schrieb Julien Nioche:
> Hi,
> 
> Following the discussion initiated by Richard [1], please vote on
> moving
> Storm from JIRA to GitHub issues
> 
> The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed.
> 
> [ ] +1 Move Storm from JIRA to GitHub issues
> [ ]  0 No opinion
> [ ] -1 Keep the issues on JIRA
> 
> Here is my +1
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Julien
> 
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/ty80h0kqfh2r7vh6wmzmhzh07njbq0jn

Re: [Discuss] Move Storm from JIRA to GitHub Issues

[Richard Zowalla]

Any additional thoughts?

Am Donnerstag, dem 22.02.2024 um 12:21 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> +1 I agree that JIRA is overkill for the simple needs of incidents /
> enhancements tracking of Apache Storm
> 
> Alexandre
> 
> Le jeu. 22 févr. 2024 à 12:18, Richard Zowalla  a
> écrit :
> > 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > The ASF JIRA instance no longer allows users to self-sign-up
> > (though it
> > DOES allow us to invite others). This is largely due to spam.
> > Most developers have a GitHub account (and that is where most folks
> > interact with Storm's code base), and this would meet folks where
> > they
> > are, as opposed to making them go somewhere else to dig through
> > issues.
> > 
> > Tentative suggestion:
> > 
> > * Go through existing Storm JIRA issues and close any issues that
> > are
> > no longer relevant.
> > * Migrate open issues to GitHub Issues in apache/storm (linking
> > back to
> > the
> > JIRA issue)
> > * All new issues will only be created in GitHub Issues
> > * When an existing JIRA issue is fixed, it will be updated in both
> > locations
> > * Make JIRA read-only for normal users
> > 
> > Potential process changes:
> > * Release notes/change logs are currently generated through JIRA.
> > We
> > would need to change that.
> > 
> > NOTE: This is not final; the above text is just to start the
> > discussion.
> > 
> > Feel free to pick holes in the above, suggest changes, or propose
> > something else!
> > 
> > Thoughts and feedback are welcome!
> > Richard



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Discuss] Move Storm from JIRA to GitHub Issues

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

The ASF JIRA instance no longer allows users to self-sign-up (though it
DOES allow us to invite others). This is largely due to spam.
Most developers have a GitHub account (and that is where most folks
interact with Storm's code base), and this would meet folks where they
are, as opposed to making them go somewhere else to dig through issues.

Tentative suggestion:

* Go through existing Storm JIRA issues and close any issues that are
no longer relevant.
* Migrate open issues to GitHub Issues in apache/storm (linking back to
the
JIRA issue)
* All new issues will only be created in GitHub Issues
* When an existing JIRA issue is fixed, it will be updated in both
locations
* Make JIRA read-only for normal users

Potential process changes:
* Release notes/change logs are currently generated through JIRA. We
would need to change that.

NOTE: This is not final; the above text is just to start the
discussion.

Feel free to pick holes in the above, suggest changes, or propose
something else!

Thoughts and feedback are welcome!
Richard

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Storm 2.6.1 Released

[Richard Zowalla]

The Apache Storm community is pleased to announce the release of Apache
Storm version 2.6.1.

Apache Storm is a distributed, fault-tolerant, and high-performance
realtime computation system that provides strong guarantees on the
processing of data. You can read more about Apache Storm on the project
website:

https://storm.apache.org/

Downloads of source and binary distributions are listed in our download
section:

https://storm.apache.org/downloads.html

You can read more about this release in the following blog post:

https://storm.apache.org/2024/02/02/storm261-released.html

Distribution artifacts are available in Maven Central at the following
coordinates:

groupId: org.apache.storm
artifactId: storm-{component}
version: 2.6.1

The full list of changes is available here [1]. Please let us know [2]
if
you encounter any problems.

Regards,
The Apache Storm Team

[1] https://downloads.apache.org/storm/apache-storm-2.6.1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 2.6.1 (RC1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

this vote passes with the following +1 being cast:

Julien Nioche (binding)
Alexandre Vermeerbergen (binding)
Richard Zowalla (binding)

Thanks to all voters. I'll proceed with the steps.

Gruß
Richard

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 2.6.1 (RC1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Here is my own +1 (binding)


Am Dienstag, dem 30.01.2024 um 09:42 +0100 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> Hi ladies & lords,
> 
> I have posted a first release candidate for Apache Storm 2.6.1
> release
> and it is ready for testing.
> 
> We fixed a few bugs and upgraded libraries.
> 
> Full list of changes in this release: 
>    
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.1-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> 
> 
> The Nexus staging repository is here:
> 
> 
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1110/
> 
> Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are here:
>     
> The release artifacts are signed with my key contained in this file:
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/KEYS
> 
> The release was made from the Apache Storm v2.6.1 tag at:
> 
> https://github.com/apache/storm/releases/tag/v2.6.1
> 
> 
> To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.1 and add
> the following to your POM:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> storm-2.6.1-rc1
> Testing Storm 2.6.1 RC1 
> 
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-
> 1110/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on
> the
> GitHub repository:
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md
> 
> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.0. 
> 
> The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed.
> 
> "How to vote" is described here:
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
> 
> When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
> 
> Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
> check the release candidate and vote.
> 
> The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
> 
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.6.1
> [ ]  0 No opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> 
> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Richard
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 2.6.1 (RC1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Any more votes?

Am Dienstag, dem 30.01.2024 um 09:42 +0100 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> Hi ladies & lords,
> 
> I have posted a first release candidate for Apache Storm 2.6.1
> release
> and it is ready for testing.
> 
> We fixed a few bugs and upgraded libraries.
> 
> Full list of changes in this release: 
>    
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.1-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> 
> 
> The Nexus staging repository is here:
> 
> 
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1110/
> 
> Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are here:
>     
> The release artifacts are signed with my key contained in this file:
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/KEYS
> 
> The release was made from the Apache Storm v2.6.1 tag at:
> 
> https://github.com/apache/storm/releases/tag/v2.6.1
> 
> 
> To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.1 and add
> the following to your POM:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> storm-2.6.1-rc1
> Testing Storm 2.6.1 RC1 
> 
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-
> 1110/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on
> the
> GitHub repository:
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md
> 
> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.0. 
> 
> The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed.
> 
> "How to vote" is described here:
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
> 
> When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
> 
> Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
> check the release candidate and vote.
> 
> The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
> 
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.6.1
> [ ]  0 No opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> 
> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Richard
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 2.6.1 (RC1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi,

we do not ship "storm-kafka-client-*" since a few versions. 
It isn't contained in 2.3.0, 2.4.0, 2.5.0 and 2.6.0 (didn't check the
others), so yes, it is intentional. (It is a collection of spouts /
bolts, trident - so more or less something a user may want to use (or
not)).

The JAR itself is available via Maven:

https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1110/org/apache/storm/storm-kafka-client/2.6.1/

Hope it helps
Richard


Am Dienstag, dem 30.01.2024 um 16:02 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Other question: to test
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-4016 I would like to have
> storm-kafka-client--2.6.1.jar, but it's not in
> apache-storm-2.6.1.tar.gz archive (binary artifacts)
> => is that intentional ?
> => from where can I find torm-kafka-client--2.6.1.jar ?
> (sorry if my questions sound trivial..)
> 
> Alexandre
> 
> Le mar. 30 janv. 2024 à 14:12, Richard Zowalla 
> a écrit :
> > 
> > Here is the missing link. It is located at the usual location:
> > 
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.1-rc1/
> > 
> > Thx for the hint!
> > 
> > 
> > Am Dienstag, dem 30.01.2024 um 14:09 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
> > Vermeerbergen:
> > > Hi Richard,
> > > 
> > > The link to "Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512
> > > signature
> > > files" is missing, can you please re-send the vote mail ?
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Alexandre
> > > 
> > > Le mar. 30 janv. 2024 à 09:42, Richard Zowalla 
> > > a
> > > écrit :
> > > > 
> > > > Hi ladies & lords,
> > > > 
> > > > I have posted a first release candidate for Apache Storm 2.6.1
> > > > release
> > > > and it is ready for testing.
> > > > 
> > > > We fixed a few bugs and upgraded libraries.
> > > > 
> > > > Full list of changes in this release:
> > > > 
> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.1-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > The Nexus staging repository is here:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1110/
> > > > 
> > > > Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are
> > > > here:
> > > > 
> > > > The release artifacts are signed with my key contained in this
> > > > file:
> > > > 
> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/KEYS
> > > > 
> > > > The release was made from the Apache Storm v2.6.1 tag at:
> > > > 
> > > > https://github.com/apache/storm/releases/tag/v2.6.1
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.1
> > > > and
> > > > add
> > > > the following to your POM:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > storm-2.6.1-rc1
> > > > Testing Storm 2.6.1 RC1 
> > > > 
> > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm
> > > > -
> > > > 1110/
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > The release was made using the Storm release process,
> > > > documented on
> > > > the
> > > > GitHub repository:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md
> > > > 
> > > > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.0.
> > > > 
> > > > The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as
> > > > needed.
> > > > 
> > > > "How to vote" is described here:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
> > > > 
> > > > When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the
> > > > release.
> > > > 
> > > > Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is
> > > > welcome
> > > > to
> > > > check the release candidate and vote.
> > > > 
> > > > The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
> > > > 
> > > > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.6.1
> > > > [ ]  0 No opinion
> > > > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks!
> > > > 
> > > > Richard
> > > > 
> > 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 2.6.1 (RC1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Here is the missing link. It is located at the usual location:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.1-rc1/

Thx for the hint!


Am Dienstag, dem 30.01.2024 um 14:09 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Hi Richard,
> 
> The link to "Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature
> files" is missing, can you please re-send the vote mail ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Alexandre
> 
> Le mar. 30 janv. 2024 à 09:42, Richard Zowalla  a
> écrit :
> > 
> > Hi ladies & lords,
> > 
> > I have posted a first release candidate for Apache Storm 2.6.1
> > release
> > and it is ready for testing.
> > 
> > We fixed a few bugs and upgraded libraries.
> > 
> > Full list of changes in this release:
> > 
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.1-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> > 
> > 
> > The Nexus staging repository is here:
> > 
> > 
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1110/
> > 
> > Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are
> > here:
> > 
> > The release artifacts are signed with my key contained in this
> > file:
> > 
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/KEYS
> > 
> > The release was made from the Apache Storm v2.6.1 tag at:
> > 
> > https://github.com/apache/storm/releases/tag/v2.6.1
> > 
> > 
> > To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.1 and
> > add
> > the following to your POM:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > storm-2.6.1-rc1
> > Testing Storm 2.6.1 RC1 
> > 
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-
> > 1110/
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on
> > the
> > GitHub repository:
> > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md
> > 
> > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.0.
> > 
> > The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as
> > needed.
> > 
> > "How to vote" is described here:
> > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
> > 
> > When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
> > 
> > Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome
> > to
> > check the release candidate and vote.
> > 
> > The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
> > 
> > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.6.1
> > [ ]  0 No opinion
> > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> > 
> > Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > 
> > Richard
> > 

[VOTE] Release Apache Storm 2.6.1 (RC1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi ladies & lords,

I have posted a first release candidate for Apache Storm 2.6.1 release
and it is ready for testing.

We fixed a few bugs and upgraded libraries.

Full list of changes in this release: 
   
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.1-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html


The Nexus staging repository is here:


https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1110/

Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are here:

The release artifacts are signed with my key contained in this file:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/KEYS

The release was made from the Apache Storm v2.6.1 tag at:

https://github.com/apache/storm/releases/tag/v2.6.1


To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.1 and add
the following to your POM:




storm-2.6.1-rc1
Testing Storm 2.6.1 RC1 
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1110/






The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on the
GitHub repository:
https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md

Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.0. 

The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed.

"How to vote" is described here:
https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate

When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.

Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
check the release candidate and vote.

The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.

[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.6.1
[ ]  0 No opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...

Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.

Thanks!

Richard

Re: Storm 2.6.1 ?

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi Alexandre,

I think, that we can rename the milestone/version from 2.7.0 to 2.6.1
as we do not have any public facing breaking changes in the API
(afaik). So instead of going 2.7.0, we can just do a 2.6.1 (imho).

Gruß
Richard

Am Freitag, dem 26.01.2024 um 09:48 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Hello Richard,
> 
> +1, you must read my mind :)
> 
> I am especially interest to get
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-4025 backported to 2.6.1
> ;
> and your recent dependency update won Kryo, please.
> 
> Kind regards,
> ALexandre
> 
> Le ven. 26 janv. 2024 à 08:40, Richard Zowalla  a
> écrit :
> > 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > we had some fixes and dependency updates in Storm since our last
> > release.
> > 
> > Any objections in going for a 2.6.1 soon? Any lib upgrades we need
> > to
> > include prior?
> > 
> > Did someone test our nightlies already?
> > 
> > 
> > Gruß
> > Richard

Storm 2.6.1 ?

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

we had some fixes and dependency updates in Storm since our last
release.

Any objections in going for a 2.6.1 soon? Any lib upgrades we need to
include prior?

Did someone test our nightlies already?


Gruß
Richard


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Contribute Docker images to Apache Storm?

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

thanks Elisey for submitting the SGA. It was received.

I just migrated the current code to
https://github.com/apache/storm-docker and made some ASF specific
updates after the code donation.

I also opened a PR against the official images to transfer ownership
https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/16035

No idea (yet) how to edit / update the README on Dockerhub, though
(didn't search how to do it).

Let's see, if the docker library maintainers require us to re-do the
transfer to also migrate the closed PRs / issues against the original
repo. Nevertheless, I hope, that they understand my explanations
regarding the new namespace apache/storm in the near future.

That being said: A huge thanks to Elisey for providing us with the code
as a starter for future docker images of Storm!

Gruß
Richard

Am Dienstag, dem 09.01.2024 um 16:21 +0500 schrieb Elisey Zanko:
> Hi all,
> 
> I’ve just signed and sent the SGA.
> 
> Let me know if you wish to switch https://hub.docker.com/_/storm to
> your git repo.
> Here’s how it could look
> like: https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/9319
> 
> Thanks,
> Elisey
> 
> > On 9 Jan 2024, at 15:46, Richard Zowalla 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > Hey Elisey,
> > 
> > it is described here:
> > https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#submitting
> > 
> > It basically goes to secret...@apache.org
> > Subject something like: "SGA for Storm Docker".
> > 
> > In the mail just add the signed SGA (as described under the link),
> > a link to the GitHub Repo (is most likely already inside the SGA)
> > and a link to this mail thread:
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/34kkzbcfr4qxcxmclgqmjc08o9s28gjz
> > 
> > Gruß
> > Richard
> > 
> > 
> > Am 9. Januar 2024 11:33:48 MEZ schrieb Elisey Zanko
> > :
> > > Hi Richard,
> > > 
> > > Sounds good to me.
> > > Where do I send the signed SGA and with what subject?
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Elisey
> > > 
> > > > On 9 Jan 2024, at 15:20, Richard Zowalla 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Hi all,
> > > > 
> > > > just got a response from the incubator.
> > > > 
> > > > What we would need from you (@Elisey) is a signed Software
> > > > License
> > > > Grant (SGA) [1] downloadable here [2].
> > > > 
> > > > It would need to follow the procedere described under "HOW-TO:
> > > > SUBMITTING LICENSE AGREEMENTS AND GRANTS".
> > > > 
> > > > Let us know, if you feel, that this would work for you.
> > > > 
> > > > Gruß & thx
> > > > Richard
> > > > 
> > > > [1]
> > > > https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#grants
> > > > [2] https://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant-template.pdf
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Am Dienstag, dem 09.01.2024 um 09:11 +0100 schrieb Richard
> > > > Zowalla:
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > 
> > > > > great news. I reached out to the ASF incubator people to
> > > > > check, which
> > > > > guidelines we need to follow in order to integrate / migrate
> > > > > ownership
> > > > > of the code (repository) to the Storm project. Let's see what
> > > > > they
> > > > > say
> > > > > would be the best strategy (even if it is just fork and re-
> > > > > license)
> > > > > and
> > > > > if a CLA would be required. (Side note: I can totall
> > > > > understand, if
> > > > > you
> > > > > wouldn't want to sign one, so we hope for the best).
> > > > > 
> > > > > It might be best to put the related Docker code into a
> > > > > separate repo
> > > > > under the ASF org on GitHub (apache/storm-docker), so we can
> > > > > publish
> > > > > under the "official" Storm Docker location and under
> > > > > apache/storm on
> > > > > Docker. By doing so, we can preserve git history.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Infra told me, that it has some benefits to put it under
> > > > > apache/storm
> > > > > since the ASF has all the premium features (rate limit, ...)
> > > > > on
> > > > > Dockerhub. Sadly, there seems to be no easy way to do an
> > > > > automatic
> &g

Re: Contribute Docker images to Apache Storm?

[Richard Zowalla]

Hey Elisey,

it is described here:
https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#submitting

It basically goes to secret...@apache.org
Subject something like: "SGA for Storm Docker".

In the mail just add the signed SGA (as described under the link), a link to 
the GitHub Repo (is most likely already inside the SGA) and a link to this mail 
thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread/34kkzbcfr4qxcxmclgqmjc08o9s28gjz

Gruß
Richard


Am 9. Januar 2024 11:33:48 MEZ schrieb Elisey Zanko :
>Hi Richard,
>
>Sounds good to me.
>Where do I send the signed SGA and with what subject?
>
>Thanks,
>Elisey
>
>> On 9 Jan 2024, at 15:20, Richard Zowalla  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> just got a response from the incubator.
>> 
>> What we would need from you (@Elisey) is a signed Software License
>> Grant (SGA) [1] downloadable here [2].
>> 
>> It would need to follow the procedere described under "HOW-TO:
>> SUBMITTING LICENSE AGREEMENTS AND GRANTS".
>> 
>> Let us know, if you feel, that this would work for you.
>> 
>> Gruß & thx
>> Richard
>> 
>> [1] https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#grants
>> [2] https://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant-template.pdf
>> 
>> 
>> Am Dienstag, dem 09.01.2024 um 09:11 +0100 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> great news. I reached out to the ASF incubator people to check, which
>>> guidelines we need to follow in order to integrate / migrate
>>> ownership
>>> of the code (repository) to the Storm project. Let's see what they
>>> say
>>> would be the best strategy (even if it is just fork and re-license)
>>> and
>>> if a CLA would be required. (Side note: I can totall understand, if
>>> you
>>> wouldn't want to sign one, so we hope for the best).
>>> 
>>> It might be best to put the related Docker code into a separate repo
>>> under the ASF org on GitHub (apache/storm-docker), so we can publish
>>> under the "official" Storm Docker location and under apache/storm on
>>> Docker. By doing so, we can preserve git history.
>>> 
>>> Infra told me, that it has some benefits to put it under apache/storm
>>> since the ASF has all the premium features (rate limit, ...) on
>>> Dockerhub. Sadly, there seems to be no easy way to do an automatic
>>> "redirect" (similar to a Maven relocation) on Dockerhub.
>>> 
>>> Gruß
>>> Richard
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Am Montag, dem 08.01.2024 um 11:47 + schrieb Julien Nioche:
>>>> Hi Elisey,
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for your email and great to hear that you'd be happy to
>>>> contribute
>>>> the code. I am CCing the Storm dev list so that our discussion is
>>>> in
>>>> the
>>>> open and members of the community can contribute to it.
>>>> 
>>>> For the people on dev@, Elisey is the author of the Storm images on
>>>> Docker
>>>> <https://hub.docker.com/_/storm> that many of us in the community
>>>> have been
>>>> using, let's thank him for that! See my message with him below as
>>>> well as
>>>> STORM-4014 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-4014>
>>>> 
>>>> @Elisey - we might need you to sign a contributor agreement
>>>> <https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html>
>>>> beforehand
>>>> and ideally change the license to be ASF v2. Would that be OK?
>>>> 
>>>> I initially thought we'd have the Docker files as part of the Storm
>>>> repo
>>>> but maybe it would be simpler to have a separate repository for it
>>>> and copy
>>>> the whole git history from your repository.
>>>> We already have the following on Dockerhub ->
>>>> https://hub.docker.com/repository/docker/apache/storm/general, not
>>>> sure how
>>>> that would work with the 'official images'.
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers
>>>> 
>>>> Julien
>>>> 
>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 at 12:00, Elisey Zanko 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Julien,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I’d be happy to contribute the image!
>>>>> Especially because I no longer actively use it myself and don’t
>>>>> have much
>>>>> time to maintain it.
>>>>> 
>>>>> If you hav

Re: Contribute Docker images to Apache Storm?

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

just got a response from the incubator.

What we would need from you (@Elisey) is a signed Software License
Grant (SGA) [1] downloadable here [2].

It would need to follow the procedere described under "HOW-TO:
SUBMITTING LICENSE AGREEMENTS AND GRANTS".

Let us know, if you feel, that this would work for you.

Gruß & thx
Richard

[1] https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#grants
[2] https://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant-template.pdf


Am Dienstag, dem 09.01.2024 um 09:11 +0100 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> Hi all,
> 
> great news. I reached out to the ASF incubator people to check, which
> guidelines we need to follow in order to integrate / migrate
> ownership
> of the code (repository) to the Storm project. Let's see what they
> say
> would be the best strategy (even if it is just fork and re-license)
> and
> if a CLA would be required. (Side note: I can totall understand, if
> you
> wouldn't want to sign one, so we hope for the best).
> 
> It might be best to put the related Docker code into a separate repo
> under the ASF org on GitHub (apache/storm-docker), so we can publish
> under the "official" Storm Docker location and under apache/storm on
> Docker. By doing so, we can preserve git history.
> 
> Infra told me, that it has some benefits to put it under apache/storm
> since the ASF has all the premium features (rate limit, ...) on
> Dockerhub. Sadly, there seems to be no easy way to do an automatic
> "redirect" (similar to a Maven relocation) on Dockerhub.
> 
> Gruß
> Richard
> 
> 
> Am Montag, dem 08.01.2024 um 11:47 + schrieb Julien Nioche:
> > Hi Elisey,
> > 
> > Thanks for your email and great to hear that you'd be happy to
> > contribute
> > the code. I am CCing the Storm dev list so that our discussion is
> > in
> > the
> > open and members of the community can contribute to it.
> > 
> > For the people on dev@, Elisey is the author of the Storm images on
> > Docker
> > <https://hub.docker.com/_/storm> that many of us in the community
> > have been
> > using, let's thank him for that! See my message with him below as
> > well as
> > STORM-4014 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-4014>
> > 
> > @Elisey - we might need you to sign a contributor agreement
> > <https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html>
> > beforehand
> > and ideally change the license to be ASF v2. Would that be OK?
> > 
> > I initially thought we'd have the Docker files as part of the Storm
> > repo
> > but maybe it would be simpler to have a separate repository for it
> > and copy
> > the whole git history from your repository.
> > We already have the following on Dockerhub ->
> > https://hub.docker.com/repository/docker/apache/storm/general, not
> > sure how
> > that would work with the 'official images'.
> > 
> > Cheers
> > 
> > Julien
> > 
> > On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 at 12:00, Elisey Zanko 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Julien,
> > > 
> > > I’d be happy to contribute the image!
> > > Especially because I no longer actively use it myself and don’t
> > > have much
> > > time to maintain it.
> > > 
> > > If you haven’t seen it already I’d suggest you to have a look at
> > > “Maintainership” section of the Docker Official Images repo:
> > > https://github.com/docker-library/official-images#maintainership
> > > 
> > > From that doc I think the most important part is:
> > > 
> > > > When taking over an existing repository, please ensure that the
> > > > entire
> > > Git history of the original repository is kept in the new
> > > upstream-maintained repository to make sure the review process
> > > isn't
> > > stalled during the transition.
> > > 
> > > Let me know how would you prefer to transfer the repo to the
> > > upstream
> > > (e.g., fork, copy commits or move ownership).
> > > 
> > > Once transferred we’ll need to create a commit to
> > > https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/blob/master/library/storm
> > > to update image maintainers and git repo.
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Elisey
> > > 
> > > > On 4 Jan 2024, at 19:56, Julien Nioche
> > > > 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Hi Elisey,
> > > > 
> > > > Happy New Year!
> > > > 
> > > > I am a committer on the Apache Storm proje

Re: Contribute Docker images to Apache Storm?

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

great news. I reached out to the ASF incubator people to check, which
guidelines we need to follow in order to integrate / migrate ownership
of the code (repository) to the Storm project. Let's see what they say
would be the best strategy (even if it is just fork and re-license) and
if a CLA would be required. (Side note: I can totall understand, if you
wouldn't want to sign one, so we hope for the best).

It might be best to put the related Docker code into a separate repo
under the ASF org on GitHub (apache/storm-docker), so we can publish
under the "official" Storm Docker location and under apache/storm on
Docker. By doing so, we can preserve git history.

Infra told me, that it has some benefits to put it under apache/storm
since the ASF has all the premium features (rate limit, ...) on
Dockerhub. Sadly, there seems to be no easy way to do an automatic
"redirect" (similar to a Maven relocation) on Dockerhub.

Gruß
Richard


Am Montag, dem 08.01.2024 um 11:47 + schrieb Julien Nioche:
> Hi Elisey,
> 
> Thanks for your email and great to hear that you'd be happy to
> contribute
> the code. I am CCing the Storm dev list so that our discussion is in
> the
> open and members of the community can contribute to it.
> 
> For the people on dev@, Elisey is the author of the Storm images on
> Docker
>  that many of us in the community
> have been
> using, let's thank him for that! See my message with him below as
> well as
> STORM-4014 
> 
> @Elisey - we might need you to sign a contributor agreement
> 
> beforehand
> and ideally change the license to be ASF v2. Would that be OK?
> 
> I initially thought we'd have the Docker files as part of the Storm
> repo
> but maybe it would be simpler to have a separate repository for it
> and copy
> the whole git history from your repository.
> We already have the following on Dockerhub ->
> https://hub.docker.com/repository/docker/apache/storm/general, not
> sure how
> that would work with the 'official images'.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Julien
> 
> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 at 12:00, Elisey Zanko 
> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Julien,
> > 
> > I’d be happy to contribute the image!
> > Especially because I no longer actively use it myself and don’t
> > have much
> > time to maintain it.
> > 
> > If you haven’t seen it already I’d suggest you to have a look at
> > “Maintainership” section of the Docker Official Images repo:
> > https://github.com/docker-library/official-images#maintainership
> > 
> > From that doc I think the most important part is:
> > 
> > > When taking over an existing repository, please ensure that the
> > > entire
> > Git history of the original repository is kept in the new
> > upstream-maintained repository to make sure the review process
> > isn't
> > stalled during the transition.
> > 
> > Let me know how would you prefer to transfer the repo to the
> > upstream
> > (e.g., fork, copy commits or move ownership).
> > 
> > Once transferred we’ll need to create a commit to
> > https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/blob/master/library/storm
> > to update image maintainers and git repo.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Elisey
> > 
> > > On 4 Jan 2024, at 19:56, Julien Nioche 
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hi Elisey,
> > > 
> > > Happy New Year!
> > > 
> > > I am a committer on the Apache Storm project and have been using
> > > the
> > images you created and maintained for a while, in particular for my
> > own
> > project StormCrawler.  So a massive thank you for that, I am very
> > grateful
> > for your work!
> > > 
> > > We've recently had a discussion about handling the Docker images
> > > within
> > the project. We could of course start from scratch but given that
> > you have
> > built them, I was wondering whether you would consider contributing
> > them to
> > the project?
> > > 
> > > Given that your files are under MIT, I assume it would also be an
> > > option
> > to copy them over to Storm along with the license.
> > > 
> > > Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this.
> > > 
> > > Kind regards
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Julien Nioche
> > > Director
> > > 
> > > 
> > > digitalpebble.com
> > 
> > 

Re: Contribute Docker images to Apache Storm?

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

great news. I reached out to the ASF incubator people to check, which
guidelines we need to follow in order to integrate / migrate ownership
of the code (repository) to the Storm project. Let's see what they say
would be the best strategy (even if it is just fork and re-license) and
if a CLA would be required. (Side note: I can totall understand, if you
wouldn't want to sign one, so we hope for the best).

It might be best to put the related Docker code into a separate repo
under the ASF org on GitHub (apache/storm-docker), so we can publish
under the "official" Storm Docker location and under apache/storm on
Docker. By doing so, we can preserve git history.

Infra told me, that it has some benefits to put it under apache/storm
since the ASF has all the premium features (rate limit, ...) on
Dockerhub. Sadly, there seems to be no easy way to do an automatic
"redirect" (similar to a Maven relocation) on Dockerhub.

Gruß
Richard


Am Montag, dem 08.01.2024 um 11:47 + schrieb Julien Nioche:
> Hi Elisey,
> 
> Thanks for your email and great to hear that you'd be happy to
> contribute
> the code. I am CCing the Storm dev list so that our discussion is in
> the
> open and members of the community can contribute to it.
> 
> For the people on dev@, Elisey is the author of the Storm images on
> Docker
>  that many of us in the community
> have been
> using, let's thank him for that! See my message with him below as
> well as
> STORM-4014 
> 
> @Elisey - we might need you to sign a contributor agreement
> 
> beforehand
> and ideally change the license to be ASF v2. Would that be OK?
> 
> I initially thought we'd have the Docker files as part of the Storm
> repo
> but maybe it would be simpler to have a separate repository for it
> and copy
> the whole git history from your repository.
> We already have the following on Dockerhub ->
> https://hub.docker.com/repository/docker/apache/storm/general, not
> sure how
> that would work with the 'official images'.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Julien
> 
> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 at 12:00, Elisey Zanko 
> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Julien,
> > 
> > I’d be happy to contribute the image!
> > Especially because I no longer actively use it myself and don’t
> > have much
> > time to maintain it.
> > 
> > If you haven’t seen it already I’d suggest you to have a look at
> > “Maintainership” section of the Docker Official Images repo:
> > https://github.com/docker-library/official-images#maintainership
> > 
> > From that doc I think the most important part is:
> > 
> > > When taking over an existing repository, please ensure that the
> > > entire
> > Git history of the original repository is kept in the new
> > upstream-maintained repository to make sure the review process
> > isn't
> > stalled during the transition.
> > 
> > Let me know how would you prefer to transfer the repo to the
> > upstream
> > (e.g., fork, copy commits or move ownership).
> > 
> > Once transferred we’ll need to create a commit to
> > https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/blob/master/library/storm
> > to update image maintainers and git repo.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Elisey
> > 
> > > On 4 Jan 2024, at 19:56, Julien Nioche 
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hi Elisey,
> > > 
> > > Happy New Year!
> > > 
> > > I am a committer on the Apache Storm project and have been using
> > > the
> > images you created and maintained for a while, in particular for my
> > own
> > project StormCrawler.  So a massive thank you for that, I am very
> > grateful
> > for your work!
> > > 
> > > We've recently had a discussion about handling the Docker images
> > > within
> > the project. We could of course start from scratch but given that
> > you have
> > built them, I was wondering whether you would consider contributing
> > them to
> > the project?
> > > 
> > > Given that your files are under MIT, I assume it would also be an
> > > option
> > to copy them over to Storm along with the license.
> > > 
> > > Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this.
> > > 
> > > Kind regards
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Julien Nioche
> > > Director
> > > 
> > > 
> > > digitalpebble.com
> > 
> > 

Re: [VOTE] Docker images for Apache Storm

[Richard Zowalla]

+1 (think it would be good to "officially" be responsible and
distribute those on our own instead of relying on 3rd party repos)

Am Montag, dem 11.12.2023 um 14:57 + schrieb Julien Nioche:
> Dear Storm community,
> 
> There was a recent discussion on the dev list [1] about a roadmap for
> the
> next release (major or minor). One of the items was to release Docker
> images for Apache Storm ourselves. There are Docker images but
> maintained
> by a third party [2]. By managing the images ourselves, we would have
> more
> control on when the images are available and also be able to fix
> issues
> quicker.
> 
> The first step is to ask Infra to give our project seats on DockerHub
> [3].
> 
> Could we have a quick vote to make sure everyone is happy to go ahead
> with this?
> 
> *[+1] publish Docker images ourselves and ask infra for seats to do
> so on
> Dockerhub*
> 
> *or *
> 
> *[-1] do not publish Docker images ourselves?*
> 
> The vote is open for the next 72 hours and will finish on Thursday,
> December 14 at  3PM UTC.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Julien Nioche
> 
> 
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/g78xg0k1m86m3o9jtj4g6p4cvvz3dhgr
> [2] https://github.com/31z4/storm-docker
> [3] https://infra.apache.org/docker-hub-policy.html



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Roadmap Apache Storm 3.x

[Richard Zowalla]

It might be possible to build an abstraction layer + java 21-based
module, so ppl can decide (for ex by configuration) to switch to it or
not. If you do not activley decide to use it, it won't be a difference
to how it is currently working. Might need some carefully thinking and
some eyes on other projects. 

Am Donnerstag, dem 07.12.2023 um 13:24 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Agreed for leaving fiber projet aside from 3.x
> 
> Re-logviewer : how about my idea to use storm-ui's app server and
> write some kind of proxy servlet to make all traffic related to logs
> retrieval going to storm UI ?
> 
> Le jeu. 7 déc. 2023 à 13:06, Julien Nioche
>  a écrit :
> > 
> > Thanks Alexandre,
> > 
> > I haven't looked nor know anything about fibers but it sounds
> > promising.
> > Forcing Java 21 would be problematic I think.
> > Given that it is a fundamental change, maybe this could live in a
> > separate
> > branch until thoroughly tested and Java 21 is the norm. What do you
> > think?
> > 
> > Re-logviewer: it is something that has been bugging people for a
> > while and
> > that a lot of us would like to see fixed I think. Sadly, I don't
> > have a
> > clue on how to do it.
> > 
> > Julien
> > 
> > On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 at 11:01, Alexandre Vermeerbergen <
> > avermeerber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hello Julien,
> > > 
> > > Excellent initiative indeed !
> > > 
> > > I am very fond of "Find a way of having the Logviewer work in
> > > Docker"
> > > topic, because I think it's similar to a shorter time need which
> > > I
> > > have when deploying AWS EC2 with a VPN to avoid exposure of
> > > "internal
> > > VMs" : in this case, the public FQDN of Supervisor VMs is not
> > > usable
> > > for logviewer, so i'm trying to figure out a way to do some
> > > proxying
> > > through Nimbus/Nimbus UI process... it's only brainstorming at
> > > the
> > > moment.
> > > 
> > > I also have recently  launched the idea to use Java fibers and
> > > got a
> > > positive feedback from Bipin, but I have no idea on whether it
> > > could
> > > be affordable for 3.x. One problem being is that unless we un-
> > > support
> > > Storm on Java < 21, we can't just build everything using JDK21 to
> > > get
> > > access to fibers API...
> > > 
> > > That were my 2 cents...
> > > 
> > > Alexandre
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Le jeu. 7 déc. 2023 à 10:43, Julien Nioche
> > >  a écrit :
> > > > 
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > Now that Storm is active again and we are getting regular
> > > > releases,
> > > should
> > > > we try to come up with a roadmap for the Storm 3.x?
> > > > 
> > > > Here are a few things that come to mind
> > > > 
> > > >    - Finish the migration from Clojure to Java (it is still
> > > > used in the
> > > >    tests I think)
> > > >    - Find a way of having the Logviewer work in Docker
> > > >    
> > > >    - Publish the Docker images ourselves
> > > >    - UI Refresh (at least the libs) - suggested by R. Zowalla
> > > >    - Fix Maven build  - suggested by R. Zowalla
> > > > 
> > > > Anything else? Who would like to get involved? Where would be a
> > > > good
> > > place
> > > > to formalise a roadmap? JIRA? GitHub projects
> > > > ?
> > > > 
> > > > Best regards
> > > > 
> > > > --
> > > > *Julien Nioche *
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > digitalpebble.com 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > *Julien Nioche *
> > 
> > 
> > digitalpebble.com 

Nightlies and Snapshot artifacts of Storm

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

I am glad to announce, that we are now publishing automatic SNAPSHOT
builds (aka nightlies) from the master branch at a daily basis.

You can find the tar.gz / zip files here:

https://nightlies.apache.org/storm/

In addition, you can find recent SNAPSHOTs on the ASF SNAPSHOT
repository: 

https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/storm/

This will allow you to do pre-testing in your environments and report
possible issues early.

We might need to fine-tune these artifacts uploaded to nightlies.ao to
include a commit hash or similar (good thing for 1st time contributors,
I guess ;-) ) or keep a history of (for example) 7 builds, but as a
first step, we are fine now.

Gruß
Richard


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[RESULT] [VOTE] Storm 2.6.0 (RC1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi folks,

this vote passes with 4 +1 from the following individuals:

- Julien Nioche (binding)
- Xin Wang (binding)
- Richard Zowalla (binding)
- Alexandre Vermeerbergen (binding)

I'll proceed with the steps. Thanks to all voters!

Richard

Re: [VOTE] Storm 2.6.0 (RC1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Here is my own +1

Am Donnerstag, dem 16.11.2023 um 10:19 +0100 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> Hi folks,
> 
> I have posted a first release candidate for the Apache Storm 2.6.0
> release and it is ready for testing.
> 
> We updated a lot of dependencies, fixes some bugs and removed some
> /external modules. We are now also testing with Java 21, which looks
> promising.
> 
> The Nexus staging repository is here:
>    
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1109/
> 
> 
> Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are here:
>    
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.0-rc1/
> 
> The release artifacts are signed with my key contained in this file:
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/KEYS
> 
> The release was made from the Apache Storm v2.6.0 tag at:
> 
> https://github.com/apache/storm/releases/tag/v2.6.0
> 
> Full list of changes in this release: 
>    
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.0-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> 
> 
> To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.0 and add
> the following to your POM:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> storm-2.6.0-rc1
> Testing Storm 2.6.0 RC1 
> 
> 
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1109/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on
> the
> GitHub repository:
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md
> 
> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.0. 
> 
> The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed.
> 
> "How to vote" is described here:
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
> 
> When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
> 
> Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
> check the release candidate and vote.
> 
> The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
> 
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.6.0
> [ ]  0 No opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> 
> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Richard

Re: [VOTE] Storm 2.6.0 (RC1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Any other votes? Maybe from the other people recently added to the PMC? :-)

Am 16. November 2023 10:19:36 MEZ schrieb Richard Zowalla :
>Hi folks,
>
>I have posted a first release candidate for the Apache Storm 2.6.0
>release and it is ready for testing.
>
>We updated a lot of dependencies, fixes some bugs and removed some
>/external modules. We are now also testing with Java 21, which looks
>promising.
>
>The Nexus staging repository is here:
>   
>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1109/
>
>
>Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are here:
>   
>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.0-rc1/
>
>The release artifacts are signed with my key contained in this file:
>
>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/KEYS
>
>The release was made from the Apache Storm v2.6.0 tag at:
>
>https://github.com/apache/storm/releases/tag/v2.6.0
>
>Full list of changes in this release: 
>   
>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.0-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>
>
>To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.0 and add
>the following to your POM:
>
>
>
>
>storm-2.6.0-rc1
>Testing Storm 2.6.0 RC1 
>
>
>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1109/
>
>
>
>
>
>The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on the
>GitHub repository:
>https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md
>
>Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.0. 
>
>The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed.
>
>"How to vote" is described here:
>https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
>
>When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
>
>Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
>check the release candidate and vote.
>
>The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
>
>[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.6.0
>[ ]  0 No opinion
>[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
>Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
>
>Thanks!
>
>Richard

[VOTE] Storm 2.6.0 (RC1)

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi folks,

I have posted a first release candidate for the Apache Storm 2.6.0
release and it is ready for testing.

We updated a lot of dependencies, fixes some bugs and removed some
/external modules. We are now also testing with Java 21, which looks
promising.

The Nexus staging repository is here:
   
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1109/


Storm Source and Binary Release with sha512 signature files are here:
   
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.0-rc1/

The release artifacts are signed with my key contained in this file:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/KEYS

The release was made from the Apache Storm v2.6.0 tag at:

https://github.com/apache/storm/releases/tag/v2.6.0

Full list of changes in this release: 
   
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.6.0-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html


To use it in a maven build set the version for Storm to 2.6.0 and add
the following to your POM:




storm-2.6.0-rc1
Testing Storm 2.6.0 RC1 


https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1109/





The release was made using the Storm release process, documented on the
GitHub repository:
https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md

Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Storm 2.6.0. 

The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed.

"How to vote" is described here:
https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate

When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.

Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
check the release candidate and vote.

The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.

[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.6.0
[ ]  0 No opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...

Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.

Thanks!

Richard

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT (a7aac90fdc4b87eba8dce3b851b55c86c4a390cf)

[Richard Zowalla]

I am going to prepare an RC1 for VOTE today.


Am Mittwoch, dem 15.11.2023 um 19:33 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Great !
> On a side note, my preproduction has been running with 2.6.0 build
> 20231114 at scale since the last 10 hours, using my usual set:
>   RedHat Linux 8
>   IBM Java Semeru 17.0.8.1 (aka OpenJ9)  - 6 big machines for
> Supervisors
>   14 topologies (with one having 5 different spouts and 9 bolts, all
> with lots of executors, using various field grouping stratefies)
>    + all topologies migrated at source level to use Jakarta EE APIs
> (like jakarta.json instead of javax.son)
> 
> => all runs smoothly with no regression.  On Supervisor machines, CPU
> is even a bit smoother (less peaks) than before this upgrade to 2.6.0
> built 2023/11/14.
> 
> So from my standpoint, we should be in good shape to have a 2.6.0
> release ASAP !
> 
> Note: I wish I had time to test all this with Java 21, but to be
> realistic I don't think it will happen before next month...
> 
> Many thanks Richard for pushing us to try snapshot releases before
> entering a vote cycle!
> 
> Alexandre
> 
> 
> Le mer. 15 nov. 2023 à 16:49, Richard Zowalla  a
> écrit :
> > 
> > Thx. The related PR is merged.
> > 
> > Am Mittwoch, dem 15.11.2023 um 15:13 +0100 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> > > Yes, feel free to provide a fix / pr + jira issue.
> > > 
> > > It is just a matter of adding
> > > 
> > >  
> > >  jakarta.xml.bind
> > >  jakarta.xml.bind-api
> > >  
> > >  
> > > 
> > > to the related pom in the /external module [1]
> > > 
> > > Gruß
> > > Richard
> > > 
> > > [1]
> > > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/external/storm-kafka-monitor/pom.xml
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Am Mittwoch, dem 15.11.2023 um 15:02 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
> > > Vermeerbergen:
> > > > I had found yet another thing that must be fixed before
> > > > starting
> > > > 2.6.0
> > > > vote: while reviewing my shells to install Storm on my Nimbus
> > > > hosts
> > > > and Supervision hosts, I found this old by-pass which I used to
> > > > put
> > > > in
> > > > place when switching from Java 11 to Java 17 at runtime:
> > > > 
> > > > cp storm-stable/lib-worker/jakarta.xml.bind-api-2.3.2.jar
> > > > storm-stable/lib-tools/storm-kafka-monitor
> > > > 
> > > > (storm-stable is the name of the directory where I extract
> > > > Storm's
> > > > binaries)
> > > > 
> > > > It turns out that this ugly by-pass is still required when
> > > > running
> > > > with Java 17 (which is my case since more than 1 year),
> > > > otherwise
> > > > the
> > > > display of Kafka lags in Storm UI is broken, and we have the
> > > > following
> > > > exceptions in ui.log:
> > > > 
> > > > 2023-11-15 10:54:27.473 o.e.j.s.AbstractConnector main [INFO]
> > > > Started
> > > > ServerConnector@e3c9c02f{HTTP/1.1, (http/1.1)}{0.0.0.0:8070}
> > > > 2023-11-15 10:54:27.474 o.e.j.s.Server main [INFO] Started
> > > > @4256ms
> > > > 2023-11-15 10:55:02.781 o.a.s.u.NimbusClient qtp-1075191296-25
> > > > [INFO]
> > > > Found leader nimbus :
> > > > ec23-1-251-0-65.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com:6627
> > > > 2023-11-15 10:59:31.128 o.a.s.u.ShellUtils qtp-1075191296-24
> > > > [INFO]
> > > > Failed running command
> > > > [/usr/local/Storm/storm-stable/bin/storm-kafka-monitor, -t,
> > > > audit,
> > > > -
> > > > g,
> > > > StormAuditPublisherTopology_SbxRealTimeSupervisionAVEEEZZeuw1,
> > > > -b,
> > > > ec23-1-251-0-66.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com,ec23-1-251-0-
> > > > 65.eu-
> > > > west-1.compute.amazonaws.com,ec2-52-18-172-77,
> > > > -s, SASL_SSL, -c, /tmp/kafka-consumer-
> > > > extra6421423768198678110props]
> > > > org.apache.storm.utils.ShellUtils$ExitCodeException: SLF4J:
> > > > Failed
> > > > to
> > > > load class "org.slf4j.impl.StaticLoggerBinder".
> > > > SLF4J: Defaulting to no-operation (NOP) logger implementation
> > > > SLF4J: See
> > > > http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#StaticLoggerBinder for
> > > > further details.
> > > > Ex

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT (a7aac90fdc4b87eba8dce3b851b55c86c4a390cf)

[Richard Zowalla]

Thx. The related PR is merged.

Am Mittwoch, dem 15.11.2023 um 15:13 +0100 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> Yes, feel free to provide a fix / pr + jira issue.
> 
> It is just a matter of adding 
> 
>  
>  jakarta.xml.bind
>  jakarta.xml.bind-api
>  
>  
> 
> to the related pom in the /external module [1]
> 
> Gruß
> Richard
> 
> [1]
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/external/storm-kafka-monitor/pom.xml
> 
> 
> Am Mittwoch, dem 15.11.2023 um 15:02 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
> Vermeerbergen:
> > I had found yet another thing that must be fixed before starting
> > 2.6.0
> > vote: while reviewing my shells to install Storm on my Nimbus hosts
> > and Supervision hosts, I found this old by-pass which I used to put
> > in
> > place when switching from Java 11 to Java 17 at runtime:
> > 
> > cp storm-stable/lib-worker/jakarta.xml.bind-api-2.3.2.jar
> > storm-stable/lib-tools/storm-kafka-monitor
> > 
> > (storm-stable is the name of the directory where I extract Storm's
> > binaries)
> > 
> > It turns out that this ugly by-pass is still required when running
> > with Java 17 (which is my case since more than 1 year), otherwise
> > the
> > display of Kafka lags in Storm UI is broken, and we have the
> > following
> > exceptions in ui.log:
> > 
> > 2023-11-15 10:54:27.473 o.e.j.s.AbstractConnector main [INFO]
> > Started
> > ServerConnector@e3c9c02f{HTTP/1.1, (http/1.1)}{0.0.0.0:8070}
> > 2023-11-15 10:54:27.474 o.e.j.s.Server main [INFO] Started @4256ms
> > 2023-11-15 10:55:02.781 o.a.s.u.NimbusClient qtp-1075191296-25
> > [INFO]
> > Found leader nimbus :
> > ec23-1-251-0-65.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com:6627
> > 2023-11-15 10:59:31.128 o.a.s.u.ShellUtils qtp-1075191296-24 [INFO]
> > Failed running command
> > [/usr/local/Storm/storm-stable/bin/storm-kafka-monitor, -t, audit,
> > -
> > g,
> > StormAuditPublisherTopology_SbxRealTimeSupervisionAVEEEZZeuw1, -b,
> > ec23-1-251-0-66.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com,ec23-1-251-0-65.eu-
> > west-1.compute.amazonaws.com,ec2-52-18-172-77,
> > -s, SASL_SSL, -c, /tmp/kafka-consumer-
> > extra6421423768198678110props]
> > org.apache.storm.utils.ShellUtils$ExitCodeException: SLF4J: Failed
> > to
> > load class "org.slf4j.impl.StaticLoggerBinder".
> > SLF4J: Defaulting to no-operation (NOP) logger implementation
> > SLF4J: See http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#StaticLoggerBinder for
> > further details.
> > Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> > javax.xml.bind.DatatypeConverter
> >  at
> > org.apache.kafka.common.security.scram.ScramMessages$ServerFirstMes
> > sa
> > ge.(ScramMessages.java:143)
> >  at
> > org.apache.kafka.common.security.scram.ScramSaslClient.evaluateChal
> > le
> > nge(ScramSaslClient.java:112)
> >  at
> > org.apache.kafka.common.security.authenticator.SaslClientAuthentica
> > to
> > r$2.run(SaslClientAuthenticator.java:280)
> >  at
> > org.apache.kafka.common.security.authenticator.SaslClientAuthentica
> > to
> > r$2.run(SaslClientAuthenticator.java:278)
> >  at
> > java.base/java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(AccessControl
> > le
> > r.java:784)
> >  at java.base/javax.security.auth.Subject.doAs(Subject.java:439)
> >  at
> > org.apache.kafka.common.security.authenticator.SaslClientAuthentica
> > to
> > r.createSaslToken(SaslClientAuthenticator.java:278)
> >  at
> > org.apache.kafka.common.security.authenticator.SaslClientAuthentica
> > to
> > r.sendSaslToken(SaslClientAuthenticator.java:215)
> >  at
> > org.apache.kafka.common.security.authenticator.SaslClientAuthentica
> > to
> > r.authenticate(SaslClientAuthenticator.java:189)
> >  at
> > org.apache.kafka.common.network.KafkaChannel.prepare(KafkaChannel.j
> > av
> > a:76)
> >  at
> > org.apache.kafka.common.network.Selector.pollSelectionKeys(Selector
> > .j
> > ava:385)
> >  at
> > org.apache.kafka.common.network.Selector.poll(Selector.java:334)
> >  at
> > org.apache.kafka.clients.NetworkClient.poll(NetworkClient.java:433)
> >  at
> > org.apache.kafka.clients.consumer.internals.ConsumerNetworkClient.p
> > ol
> > l(ConsumerNetworkClient.java:232)
> >  at
> > org.apache.kafka.clients.consumer.internals.ConsumerNetworkClient.p
> > ol
> > l(ConsumerNetworkClient.java:208)
> >  at
> > org.apache.kafka.clients.consumer.internals.ConsumerNetworkClient.p
> > o

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT (a7aac90fdc4b87eba8dce3b851b55c86c4a390cf)

[Richard Zowalla]

r.java:1095)
>  ... 20 more
> 
>  at org.apache.storm.utils.ShellUtils.runCommand(ShellUtils.java:264)
> ~[storm-client-2.6.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:2.6.0-SNAPSHOT]
> 
> copying jakarta.xml.bind-api-2.3.2.jar to
> storm-stable/lib-tools/storm-kafka-monitor and restarting storm-ui
> solves the problem.
> 
> => Would it be possible to include jakarta.xml.bind-api-2.3.2.jar in
> lib-tools/storm-kafka-monitor/ directory of binary Storm archive out
> of the box?
> 
> Thanks,
> Alexandre
> 
> Le mar. 14 nov. 2023 à 17:50, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
>  a écrit :
> > 
> > Good news on my side:
> > * First test with 2.6.0 snapshot 2023/11/14 with a single
> > Supervisor host is OK
> >    => I will soon (tomorrow) be able to upgrade my pre production
> > cluster to have a wider scope & performance results "at scale"
> > * My crazy attempt to convert all my topologies code from Java EE
> > API
> > to Jakarta EE API is finally working *fine*, the issue was lying
> > between my keyboard and my seat (I used a misconfigured Kafka
> > cluster
> > with my mostly Kafka-depending topologies). So it means that
> > regardless of the fact that Storm internally still relies on Java
> > EE
> > artefacts, a bunch of code migrated to Jakarta EE runs anway -
> > that's
> > what I like (smooth transitions)
> > 
> > I update when I'll have results on my pre-production cluster at
> > scale
> > (max Thursday)
> > 
> > Alexandre
> > 
> > Le mar. 14 nov. 2023 à 16:46, Julien Nioche
> >  a écrit :
> > > 
> > > Thanks Richard,
> > > 
> > > I have tested the latest snapshot with a simple crawl topology in
> > > local and
> > > deployed mode + a more complex one which generates WARC files
> > > (and
> > > therefore the HDFS resouces), again both in local and remote
> > > mode.
> > > No issues found, everything is looking fine
> > > 
> > > Julien
> > > 
> > > On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 at 09:52, Richard Zowalla 
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Hi all,
> > > > 
> > > > as written in the other thread, I have prepared another
> > > > SNAPSHOT
> > > > artifact incorporting the feedbach received in the first round.
> > > > 
> > > > I would like to receive some feedback on the current SNAPSHOT
> > > > build
> > > > again.
> > > > 
> > > > I just uploaded a 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT of Storm build from
> > > > 
> > > > https://github.com/apache/storm/commit/a7aac90fdc4b87eba8dce3b851b55c86c4a390cf
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > It is available via the ASF Snapshot repository:
> > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/
> > > > 
> > > > You can consume by adding
> > > > 
> > > >  
> > > >   apache.snapshots
> > > >   Apache Snapshot Repository
> > > >   https://repository.apache.org/snapshots
> > > >   
> > > >     false
> > > >   
> > > >  
> > > > 
> > > > to your project pom. As we do not deploy SNAPSHOTS
> > > > automatically, it
> > > > should be easy to just consume the latest SNAPSHOT.
> > > > 
> > > > The packaged binaries are available at nightlies.apache.org:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > https://nightlies.apache.org/storm/2.6.0-SNAPSHOT/a7aac90fdc4b87eba8dce3b851b55c86c4a390cf/
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > If you have some minutes left: Please test and report any
> > > > issues with
> > > > this binaries, so we can fix before attempting to release.
> > > > 
> > > > The most significant changes are some fixes of ui-related bugs
> > > > +
> > > > upgrades of dependencies with CVEs, etc.
> > > > 
> > > > Here is a diff:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > https://github.com/apache/storm/compare/8f883086032669a8f04b09a3b312d60af5b44533..a7aac90fdc4b87eba8dce3b851b55c86c4a390cf
> > > > 
> > > > A summary in Jira is here:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314820=12353484
> > > > 
> > > > Gruß
> > > > Richard
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > --
> > > 
> > > *Open Source Solutions for Text Engineering*
> > > 
> > > http://www.digitalpebble.com
> > > http://digitalpebble.blogspot.com/
> > > #digitalpebble <http://twitter.com/digitalpebble>

[HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT (a7aac90fdc4b87eba8dce3b851b55c86c4a390cf)

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

as written in the other thread, I have prepared another SNAPSHOT
artifact incorporting the feedbach received in the first round. 

I would like to receive some feedback on the current SNAPSHOT build
again.

I just uploaded a 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT of Storm build from
https://github.com/apache/storm/commit/a7aac90fdc4b87eba8dce3b851b55c86c4a390cf


It is available via the ASF Snapshot repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/

You can consume by adding

 
  apache.snapshots
  Apache Snapshot Repository
  https://repository.apache.org/snapshots
  
    false
  
 

to your project pom. As we do not deploy SNAPSHOTS automatically, it
should be easy to just consume the latest SNAPSHOT.

The packaged binaries are available at nightlies.apache.org:

https://nightlies.apache.org/storm/2.6.0-SNAPSHOT/a7aac90fdc4b87eba8dce3b851b55c86c4a390cf/


If you have some minutes left: Please test and report any issues with
this binaries, so we can fix before attempting to release. 

The most significant changes are some fixes of ui-related bugs +
upgrades of dependencies with CVEs, etc.

Here is a diff: 

https://github.com/apache/storm/compare/8f883086032669a8f04b09a3b312d60af5b44533..a7aac90fdc4b87eba8dce3b851b55c86c4a390cf

A summary in Jira is here:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314820=12353484

Gruß
Richard





signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT

[Richard Zowalla]

Here is the fix:
https://github.com/apache/storm/commit/d640cea65b1cbc71c85c220073e68442c3269a93

I will provide a new snapshot soon (= new thread as this one is really
long), so Julien can do his tests on the hdfs/hadoop stuff in the
context of crawling work ;-)

Gruß
Richard


Am Montag, dem 13.11.2023 um 22:54 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Yet another regression on in-work 2.6.0 : the supervisor.html view is
> broken, there's a Javascript syntax error (probably my fault again).
> It' s bit late for me, I'll check that tomorrow...
> 
> Alexandre
> 
> Le lun. 13 nov. 2023 à 15:36, Julien Nioche
>  a écrit :
> > 
> > I agree with Richard. The next release contains enough big changes
> > and it
> > would be good to release it ASAP before embarking on another big
> > modification.
> > 
> > Julien
> > 
> > On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 12:08, Richard Zowalla 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > yes - in principal I agree, that switching to slf4j 2.x would be
> > > great
> > > in the near future. However, it requires some more work due to
> > > our old
> > > dependency stack ("external modules", ...) and most likely a lot
> > > of
> > > exclusions.
> > > 
> > > Therefore, personally, I wouldn't see it in a 2.6.0 release but
> > > as a
> > > task on which we could work after having a new version in the
> > > pipeline
> > > 
> > > wdyt?
> > > 
> > > Gruß
> > > Richard
> > > 
> > > Am Sonntag, dem 12.11.2023 um 09:40 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
> > > Vermeerbergen:
> > > > Thank Richard for the great work to cleanup CVEs on in-work
> > > > 2.6.0 !
> > > > One last "regret" I have with current in-work 2.6.0 is that we
> > > > still
> > > > rely on very old slf4j 1.x.
> > > > While it was not on slf4j itself, the log4shell CVE should
> > > > remind us
> > > > that we should keep loggers as up to date as possible.
> > > > 
> > > > I see in a deployed Storm runtime the following hits:
> > > > 
> > > > [root]# find . -name "slf*jar" -print
> > > > ./lib/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> > > > ./lib-tools/storm-kafka-monitor/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> > > > ./lib-tools/submit-tools/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> > > > ./lib-tools/sql/core/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> > > > ./lib-tools/sql/runtime/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> > > > ./external/storm-autocreds/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> > > > ./lib-worker/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> > > > ./lib-webapp/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> > > > 
> > > > From https://www.slf4j.org/download.html it is said that "The
> > > > older
> > > > stable SLF4J version is 1.7.36. It is no longer actively
> > > > developed."
> > > > 
> > > > The most current version of slf4j is 2.0.9.
> > > > 
> > > > But I think at same time we would need to update these ones
> > > > too,
> > > > otherwise we will have a mismatch between SLF4J v1 logger
> > > > implementations vs new v2 APIs:
> > > > 
> > > > [root@ip-172-31-43-21 storm-stable]# find . -name "log*jar" -
> > > > print
> > > > ./lib/log4j-over-slf4j-1.7.36.jar
> > > > ./lib/log4j-api-2.20.0.jar
> > > > ./lib/log4j-slf4j-impl-2.20.0.jar
> > > > ./lib/log4j-core-2.20.0.jar
> > > > ./external/storm-autocreds/log4j-api-2.20.0.jar
> > > > ./external/storm-autocreds/log4j-web-2.20.0.jar
> > > > ./external/storm-autocreds/log4j-1.2-api-2.20.0.jar
> > > > ./external/storm-autocreds/log4j-core-2.20.0.jar
> > > > ./lib-worker/log4j-over-slf4j-1.7.36.jar
> > > > ./lib-worker/log4j-api-2.20.0.jar
> > > > ./lib-worker/log4j-slf4j-impl-2.20.0.jar
> > > > ./lib-worker/log4j-core-2.20.0.jar
> > > > ./lib-webapp/log4j-over-slf4j-1.7.36.jar
> > > > ./lib-webapp/log4j-api-2.20.0.jar
> > > > ./lib-webapp/log4j-core-2.20.0.jar
> > > > 
> > > > Disclaimer: I have no idea how hard this update would be.
> > > > 
> > > > Anyone with good experience at updating SLF4J & related loggers
> > > > could
> > > > react on this proposal ?
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Alexandre
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Le jeu. 9 nov. 2023 à 15:04, Richard Zo

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi,

yes - in principal I agree, that switching to slf4j 2.x would be great
in the near future. However, it requires some more work due to our old
dependency stack ("external modules", ...) and most likely a lot of
exclusions. 

Therefore, personally, I wouldn't see it in a 2.6.0 release but as a
task on which we could work after having a new version in the pipeline

wdyt?

Gruß
Richard

Am Sonntag, dem 12.11.2023 um 09:40 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Thank Richard for the great work to cleanup CVEs on in-work 2.6.0 !
> One last "regret" I have with current in-work 2.6.0 is that we still
> rely on very old slf4j 1.x.
> While it was not on slf4j itself, the log4shell CVE should remind us
> that we should keep loggers as up to date as possible.
> 
> I see in a deployed Storm runtime the following hits:
> 
> [root]# find . -name "slf*jar" -print
> ./lib/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> ./lib-tools/storm-kafka-monitor/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> ./lib-tools/submit-tools/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> ./lib-tools/sql/core/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> ./lib-tools/sql/runtime/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> ./external/storm-autocreds/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> ./lib-worker/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> ./lib-webapp/slf4j-api-1.7.36.jar
> 
> From https://www.slf4j.org/download.html it is said that "The older
> stable SLF4J version is 1.7.36. It is no longer actively developed."
> 
> The most current version of slf4j is 2.0.9.
> 
> But I think at same time we would need to update these ones too,
> otherwise we will have a mismatch between SLF4J v1 logger
> implementations vs new v2 APIs:
> 
> [root@ip-172-31-43-21 storm-stable]# find . -name "log*jar" -print
> ./lib/log4j-over-slf4j-1.7.36.jar
> ./lib/log4j-api-2.20.0.jar
> ./lib/log4j-slf4j-impl-2.20.0.jar
> ./lib/log4j-core-2.20.0.jar
> ./external/storm-autocreds/log4j-api-2.20.0.jar
> ./external/storm-autocreds/log4j-web-2.20.0.jar
> ./external/storm-autocreds/log4j-1.2-api-2.20.0.jar
> ./external/storm-autocreds/log4j-core-2.20.0.jar
> ./lib-worker/log4j-over-slf4j-1.7.36.jar
> ./lib-worker/log4j-api-2.20.0.jar
> ./lib-worker/log4j-slf4j-impl-2.20.0.jar
> ./lib-worker/log4j-core-2.20.0.jar
> ./lib-webapp/log4j-over-slf4j-1.7.36.jar
> ./lib-webapp/log4j-api-2.20.0.jar
> ./lib-webapp/log4j-core-2.20.0.jar
> 
> Disclaimer: I have no idea how hard this update would be.
> 
> Anyone with good experience at updating SLF4J & related loggers could
> react on this proposal ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Alexandre
> 
> 
> Le jeu. 9 nov. 2023 à 15:04, Richard Zowalla  a
> écrit :
> > 
> > Ok, most of the stuff reported by grype should be fixed now.
> > I might be able to push a new snapshot within the next week, so we
> > can
> > do some testing and than go for a release candiate / vote :)
> > 
> > Gruß
> > Richard
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Am Donnerstag, dem 09.11.2023 um 08:53 +0100 schrieb Richard
> > Zowalla:
> > > Maybe just run grype [1] on the lib directories and post the
> > > output
> > > on
> > > the list / thread, so we can create tickets for it
> > > 
> > > There might be some false positives but will give good insights.
> > > 
> > > Gruß
> > > Richard
> > > 
> > > 
> > > [1] https://github.com/anchore/grype
> > > Am Donnerstag, dem 09.11.2023 um 08:49 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
> > > Vermeerbergen:
> > > > Yet another finding on my side to "not call yet for vote on a
> > > > Storm
> > > > 2.6.0", we have some CVEs and we shoudn't release a version
> > > > having
> > > > known CVEs.
> > > > 
> > > > For example, we have
> > > > 
> > > >  find . -name "commons-text*jar" -print
> > > > ./lib-webapp/commons-text-1.9.jar
> > > > ./external/storm-autocreds/commons-text-1.10.0.jar
> > > > 
> > > > The second one is okay from
> > > > https://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2022-42889/ perspective, but
> > > > not
> > > > the first one.
> > > > 
> > > > I will continue checking if there are other CVEs...
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Alexandre
> > > > 
> > > > Le mar. 7 nov. 2023 à 17:43, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> > > >  a écrit :
> > > > > 
> > > > > Oh thank you very much for this cherry-pinking, I was too
> > > > > busy
> > > > > doing
> > > > > other unrelated stuff..
> > > > > 
> > > > >

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT

[Richard Zowalla]

Ok, most of the stuff reported by grype should be fixed now.
I might be able to push a new snapshot within the next week, so we can
do some testing and than go for a release candiate / vote :)

Gruß
Richard



Am Donnerstag, dem 09.11.2023 um 08:53 +0100 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> Maybe just run grype [1] on the lib directories and post the output
> on
> the list / thread, so we can create tickets for it
> 
> There might be some false positives but will give good insights.
> 
> Gruß
> Richard
> 
> 
> [1] https://github.com/anchore/grype
> Am Donnerstag, dem 09.11.2023 um 08:49 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
> Vermeerbergen:
> > Yet another finding on my side to "not call yet for vote on a Storm
> > 2.6.0", we have some CVEs and we shoudn't release a version having
> > known CVEs.
> > 
> > For example, we have
> > 
> >  find . -name "commons-text*jar" -print
> > ./lib-webapp/commons-text-1.9.jar
> > ./external/storm-autocreds/commons-text-1.10.0.jar
> > 
> > The second one is okay from
> > https://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2022-42889/ perspective, but not
> > the first one.
> > 
> > I will continue checking if there are other CVEs...
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Alexandre
> > 
> > Le mar. 7 nov. 2023 à 17:43, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> >  a écrit :
> > > 
> > > Oh thank you very much for this cherry-pinking, I was too busy
> > > doing
> > > other unrelated stuff..
> > > 
> > > Le mar. 7 nov. 2023 à 17:35, Richard Zowalla  a
> > > écrit :
> > > > 
> > > > I cherry-picked your commit and put that on master
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Am Dienstag, dem 07.11.2023 um 17:25 +0100 schrieb Richard
> > > > Zowalla:
> > > > > You pushed on your own branch. You would need to push to
> > > > > apache/storm
> > > > > main branch or open a PR ;-)
> > > > > 
> > > > > Am Samstag, dem 04.11.2023 um 10:36 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
> > > > > Vermeerbergen:
> > > > > > Just did a 'git push' with that trivial fix... is that
> > > > > > enough?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 09:34, Richard Zowalla
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > écrit :
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > You can do as you like ;-)
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Am 4. November 2023 08:54:48 MEZ schrieb Alexandre
> > > > > > > Vermeerbergen
> > > > > > > :
> > > > > > > > I mean :
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Can I keep using my
> > > > > > > > 'STORM-3958-Capacity-to-set-St
> > > > > > > > orm-UI's-title-in-conf/storm.yaml'
> > > > > > > > branch to push this fix, or should I create a new one?
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 08:53, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> > > > > > > >  a écrit :
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Can you keep using my
> > > > > > > > > 'STORM-3958-Capacity-to-set-Storm-UI's-title-in-
> > > > > > > > > conf/storm.yaml'
> > > > > > > > > branch to push this fix, or should I create a new
> > > > > > > > > one?
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 08:14, Richard Zowalla
> > > > > > > > >  a écrit :
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Just push a fix for it (referencing the original
> > > > > > > > > > issue) ;-)
> > > > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > > > we hadn't a release in between, so not a big deal.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Am 4. November 2023 08:01:54 MEZ schrieb Alexandre
> > > > > > > > > > Vermeerbergen :
> > > > > > > > > > > Temporary workaround for the Storm UI title's
> > > > > > > > > > > regression:
> > > > > > > > > > > run this
> > > > > > > > > > > command on the title-template.html file (in
>

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT

[Richard Zowalla]

Maybe just run grype [1] on the lib directories and post the output on
the list / thread, so we can create tickets for it

There might be some false positives but will give good insights.

Gruß
Richard


[1] https://github.com/anchore/grype
Am Donnerstag, dem 09.11.2023 um 08:49 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Yet another finding on my side to "not call yet for vote on a Storm
> 2.6.0", we have some CVEs and we shoudn't release a version having
> known CVEs.
> 
> For example, we have
> 
>  find . -name "commons-text*jar" -print
> ./lib-webapp/commons-text-1.9.jar
> ./external/storm-autocreds/commons-text-1.10.0.jar
> 
> The second one is okay from
> https://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2022-42889/ perspective, but not
> the first one.
> 
> I will continue checking if there are other CVEs...
> 
> Thanks,
> Alexandre
> 
> Le mar. 7 nov. 2023 à 17:43, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
>  a écrit :
> > 
> > Oh thank you very much for this cherry-pinking, I was too busy
> > doing
> > other unrelated stuff..
> > 
> > Le mar. 7 nov. 2023 à 17:35, Richard Zowalla  a
> > écrit :
> > > 
> > > I cherry-picked your commit and put that on master
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Am Dienstag, dem 07.11.2023 um 17:25 +0100 schrieb Richard
> > > Zowalla:
> > > > You pushed on your own branch. You would need to push to
> > > > apache/storm
> > > > main branch or open a PR ;-)
> > > > 
> > > > Am Samstag, dem 04.11.2023 um 10:36 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
> > > > Vermeerbergen:
> > > > > Just did a 'git push' with that trivial fix... is that
> > > > > enough?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 09:34, Richard Zowalla
> > > > > 
> > > > > a
> > > > > écrit :
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > You can do as you like ;-)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Am 4. November 2023 08:54:48 MEZ schrieb Alexandre
> > > > > > Vermeerbergen
> > > > > > :
> > > > > > > I mean :
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Can I keep using my
> > > > > > > 'STORM-3958-Capacity-to-set-St
> > > > > > > orm-UI's-title-in-conf/storm.yaml'
> > > > > > > branch to push this fix, or should I create a new one?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 08:53, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> > > > > > >  a écrit :
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Can you keep using my
> > > > > > > > 'STORM-3958-Capacity-to-set-Storm-UI's-title-in-
> > > > > > > > conf/storm.yaml'
> > > > > > > > branch to push this fix, or should I create a new one?
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 08:14, Richard Zowalla
> > > > > > > >  a écrit :
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Just push a fix for it (referencing the original
> > > > > > > > > issue) ;-)
> > > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > > we hadn't a release in between, so not a big deal.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Am 4. November 2023 08:01:54 MEZ schrieb Alexandre
> > > > > > > > > Vermeerbergen :
> > > > > > > > > > Temporary workaround for the Storm UI title's
> > > > > > > > > > regression:
> > > > > > > > > > run this
> > > > > > > > > > command on the title-template.html file (in
> > > > > > > > > > storm-stable/public/templates directory) after
> > > > > > > > > > having
> > > > > > > > > > extracted the
> > > > > > > > > > binary archive:
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > sed -i 's/{{ui\.title}}/{{title}}/' title-
> > > > > > > > > > template.html
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Again sorry for having introduced this regression.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Alexandre
> > >

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT

[Richard Zowalla]

I cherry-picked your commit and put that on master


Am Dienstag, dem 07.11.2023 um 17:25 +0100 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> You pushed on your own branch. You would need to push to apache/storm
> main branch or open a PR ;-)
> 
> Am Samstag, dem 04.11.2023 um 10:36 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
> Vermeerbergen:
> > Just did a 'git push' with that trivial fix... is that enough?
> > 
> > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 09:34, Richard Zowalla 
> > a
> > écrit :
> > > 
> > > You can do as you like ;-)
> > > 
> > > Am 4. November 2023 08:54:48 MEZ schrieb Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> > > :
> > > > I mean :
> > > > 
> > > > Can I keep using my
> > > > 'STORM-3958-Capacity-to-set-St
> > > > orm-UI's-title-in-conf/storm.yaml'
> > > > branch to push this fix, or should I create a new one?
> > > > 
> > > > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 08:53, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> > > >  a écrit :
> > > > > 
> > > > > Can you keep using my
> > > > > 'STORM-3958-Capacity-to-set-Storm-UI's-title-in-
> > > > > conf/storm.yaml'
> > > > > branch to push this fix, or should I create a new one?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 08:14, Richard Zowalla
> > > > >  a écrit :
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Just push a fix for it (referencing the original issue) ;-)
> > > > > > -
> > > > > > we hadn't a release in between, so not a big deal.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Am 4. November 2023 08:01:54 MEZ schrieb Alexandre
> > > > > > Vermeerbergen :
> > > > > > > Temporary workaround for the Storm UI title's regression:
> > > > > > > run this
> > > > > > > command on the title-template.html file (in
> > > > > > > storm-stable/public/templates directory) after having
> > > > > > > extracted the
> > > > > > > binary archive:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > sed -i 's/{{ui\.title}}/{{title}}/' title-template.html
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Again sorry for having introduced this regression.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Alexandre
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 07:52, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> > > > > > >  a écrit :
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Updates regarding my test with Storm 2.6.0 Snapshot
> > > > > > > > 2023/11/02:
> > > > > > > >  1. I have modified my KO bolts using this pattern in
> > > > > > > > their prepare() method:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > >    long cacheMaxSize =
> > > > > > > > Long.parseLong(stormConf.get(ConfKeys.SVC_DEF_CACHE_SIZ
> > > > > > > > E)
> > > > > > > > .toString());
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > >    instead of:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > >    long cacheMaxSize = (Long)
> > > > > > > > stormConf.get(ConfKeys.SVC_DEF_CACHE_SIZE);
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 2. I have found the cause of the regression in loss of
> > > > > > > > 'Storm UI'
> > > > > > > > title at the top left-hand side of all Storm UI's
> > > > > > > > pages.
> > > > > > > >     This is a mistake of mine in this PR:
> > > > > > > >    
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3580/commits/0320ee6f2d367086b973b504a976ae6aff853ccd
> > > > > > > >     More precisely, at line 19 of this file:
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3580/commits/0320ee6f2d367086b973b504a976ae6aff853ccd#diff-6d3a4162a8af826a25a2b8cd6763c08e9bc5165b736b45890b84fa50597d7481
> > > > > > > >     we must have:
> > > > > > > > {{title}}
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > instead of:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > {{ui.title}}
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > >    I think I missed this during my tests be

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT

[Richard Zowalla]

We dropped "org.json.simple.*" and replaced it with JSON from
"net.minidev". 

So it would be best to replace that dependency (should be a namespace
shift only).


Am Samstag, dem 04.11.2023 um 20:57 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Yes another regression I found with my topologies (built with 2.5.0
> dependencies) running to Storm 2.6.0 SNAPSHOT 2023/11/02: I have seen
> several exceptions like this one:
> 
> 2023-11-04 18:43:31.696 o.a.s.e.e.ReportError
> Thread-16-alertsHistoryUMToKafka-executor[27, 27] [ERROR] Error
> java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> org.apache.storm.shade.org.json.simple.JSONObject
>     at org.apache.storm.utils.Utils$1.run(Utils.java:413)
> ~[storm-client-2.6.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:2.6.0-SNAPSHOT]
>     at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:857) [?:?]
> Caused by: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> org.apache.storm.shade.org.json.simple.JSONObject
>     at
> com.acme.storm.evaluator.bolt.AlertHistoryTupleToKafkaMapper.getMessa
> geFromTuple(AlertHistoryTupleToKafkaMapper.java:25)
> ~[stormjar.jar:?]
>     at
> com.acme.storm.evaluator.bolt.AlertHistoryTupleToKafkaMapper.getMessa
> geFromTuple(AlertHistoryTupleToKafkaMapper.java:11)
> ~[stormjar.jar:?]
>     at
> org.apache.storm.kafka.bolt.KafkaBolt.process(KafkaBolt.java:177)
> ~[stormjar.jar:?]
> 
> and here's the related source code:
> 
> package com.acme.storm.evaluator.bolt;
> 
> import org.apache.storm.kafka.bolt.mapper.TupleToKafkaMapper;
> import org.apache.storm.shade.org.json.simple.JSONObject;
> import org.apache.storm.tuple.Tuple;
> import org.slf4j.Logger;
> import org.slf4j.LoggerFactory;
> 
> import com.acme.storm.util.TupleAlertHistoryFields;
> 
> public class AlertHistoryTupleToKafkaMapper implements
> TupleToKafkaMapper {
>     private static final long serialVersionUID =
> 5668103889461721134L;
> 
>     public static final Logger logger =
> LoggerFactory.getLogger(AlertHistoryTupleToKafkaMapper.class);
> 
>     @Override
>     public String getKeyFromTuple(Tuple tuple) {
>     return
> tuple.getStringByField(TupleAlertHistoryFields.SERVICE_DEFINITION_NAM
> E);
>     }
> 
>     @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
>     @Override
>     public String getMessageFromTuple(Tuple tuple)
>     {
>     JSONObject tupleJson = new JSONObject();
> 
>     tuple.getFields().forEach(f -> {
>     tupleJson.put(f, tuple.getValueByField(f));
>     });
> 
>     String jsonString = tupleJson.toJSONString();
> 
>     return jsonString;
>     }
> }
> 
> line #25 is this one:
> 
>     JSONObject tupleJson = new JSONObject();
> 
> so, from what I understand, Storm 2.6.0 no longer exposes some shaded
> classes such as:
> 
> org.apache.storm.shade.org.json.simple.JSONObject;
> 
> Interestingly, it looks similar to this issue:
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/33377291/java-lang-noclassdeffounderror-org-json-simple-jsonvalue-at-storm-kafka-dynamic
> 
> Whatever, I guess I can only blame our own code for using Storm's
> shaded classes, right ?
> Note it's been running as is for long time and not breaking since
> many
> upgrades, of course it's not an excuse...
> 
> I'll fix our code & continue checking if I see other impacts of 2.5.0
> -> 2.6.0 upgrade...
> 
> Thanks,
> Alexandre
> 
> Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 10:36, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
>  a écrit :
> > 
> > Just did a 'git push' with that trivial fix... is that enough?
> > 
> > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 09:34, Richard Zowalla 
> > a écrit :
> > > 
> > > You can do as you like ;-)
> > > 
> > > Am 4. November 2023 08:54:48 MEZ schrieb Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> > > :
> > > > I mean :
> > > > 
> > > > Can I keep using my
> > > > 'STORM-3958-Capacity-to-set-St
> > > > orm-UI's-title-in-conf/storm.yaml'
> > > > branch to push this fix, or should I create a new one?
> > > > 
> > > > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 08:53, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> > > >  a écrit :
> > > > > 
> > > > > Can you keep using my
> > > > > 'STORM-3958-Capacity-to-set-Storm-UI's-title-in-
> > > > > conf/storm.yaml'
> > > > > branch to push this fix, or should I create a new one?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 08:14, Richard Zowalla
> > > > >  a écrit :
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Just push a fix for it (referencing the original issue) ;-)
> > > > > > - we hadn't a release in between, so not a

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT

[Richard Zowalla]

You pushed on your own branch. You would need to push to apache/storm
main branch or open a PR ;-)

Am Samstag, dem 04.11.2023 um 10:36 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Just did a 'git push' with that trivial fix... is that enough?
> 
> Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 09:34, Richard Zowalla  a
> écrit :
> > 
> > You can do as you like ;-)
> > 
> > Am 4. November 2023 08:54:48 MEZ schrieb Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> > :
> > > I mean :
> > > 
> > > Can I keep using my
> > > 'STORM-3958-Capacity-to-set-St
> > > orm-UI's-title-in-conf/storm.yaml'
> > > branch to push this fix, or should I create a new one?
> > > 
> > > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 08:53, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> > >  a écrit :
> > > > 
> > > > Can you keep using my
> > > > 'STORM-3958-Capacity-to-set-Storm-UI's-title-in-
> > > > conf/storm.yaml'
> > > > branch to push this fix, or should I create a new one?
> > > > 
> > > > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 08:14, Richard Zowalla
> > > >  a écrit :
> > > > > 
> > > > > Just push a fix for it (referencing the original issue) ;-) -
> > > > > we hadn't a release in between, so not a big deal.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Am 4. November 2023 08:01:54 MEZ schrieb Alexandre
> > > > > Vermeerbergen :
> > > > > > Temporary workaround for the Storm UI title's regression:
> > > > > > run this
> > > > > > command on the title-template.html file (in
> > > > > > storm-stable/public/templates directory) after having
> > > > > > extracted the
> > > > > > binary archive:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > sed -i 's/{{ui\.title}}/{{title}}/' title-template.html
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Again sorry for having introduced this regression.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Alexandre
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 07:52, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> > > > > >  a écrit :
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Updates regarding my test with Storm 2.6.0 Snapshot
> > > > > > > 2023/11/02:
> > > > > > >  1. I have modified my KO bolts using this pattern in
> > > > > > > their prepare() method:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > >    long cacheMaxSize =
> > > > > > > Long.parseLong(stormConf.get(ConfKeys.SVC_DEF_CACHE_SIZE)
> > > > > > > .toString());
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > >    instead of:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > >    long cacheMaxSize = (Long)
> > > > > > > stormConf.get(ConfKeys.SVC_DEF_CACHE_SIZE);
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 2. I have found the cause of the regression in loss of
> > > > > > > 'Storm UI'
> > > > > > > title at the top left-hand side of all Storm UI's pages.
> > > > > > >     This is a mistake of mine in this PR:
> > > > > > >    
> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3580/commits/0320ee6f2d367086b973b504a976ae6aff853ccd
> > > > > > >     More precisely, at line 19 of this file:
> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3580/commits/0320ee6f2d367086b973b504a976ae6aff853ccd#diff-6d3a4162a8af826a25a2b8cd6763c08e9bc5165b736b45890b84fa50597d7481
> > > > > > >     we must have:
> > > > > > > {{title}}
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > instead of:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > {{ui.title}}
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > >    I think I missed this during my tests because of
> > > > > > > browser's cache
> > > > > > > (bad excuse, I know...): probably I tested by-patching my
> > > > > > > deployed
> > > > > > > Storm cluster, and I finally forgot to checkout this
> > > > > > > latest change of
> > > > > > > my delivery.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > >    I had to use "private navigation" to make sure this
> > > > > > > time it fixes this issue
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > What would be

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT

[Richard Zowalla]

You can do as you like ;-)

Am 4. November 2023 08:54:48 MEZ schrieb Alexandre Vermeerbergen 
:
>I mean :
>
>Can I keep using my
>'STORM-3958-Capacity-to-set-St
>orm-UI's-title-in-conf/storm.yaml'
>branch to push this fix, or should I create a new one?
>
>Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 08:53, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> a écrit :
>>
>> Can you keep using my
>> 'STORM-3958-Capacity-to-set-Storm-UI's-title-in-conf/storm.yaml'
>> branch to push this fix, or should I create a new one?
>>
>> Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 08:14, Richard Zowalla  a écrit :
>> >
>> > Just push a fix for it (referencing the original issue) ;-) - we hadn't a 
>> > release in between, so not a big deal.
>> >
>> > Am 4. November 2023 08:01:54 MEZ schrieb Alexandre Vermeerbergen 
>> > :
>> > >Temporary workaround for the Storm UI title's regression: run this
>> > >command on the title-template.html file (in
>> > >storm-stable/public/templates directory) after having extracted the
>> > >binary archive:
>> > >
>> > >sed -i 's/{{ui\.title}}/{{title}}/' title-template.html
>> > >
>> > >Again sorry for having introduced this regression.
>> > >
>> > >Alexandre
>> > >
>> > >Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 07:52, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
>> > > a écrit :
>> > >>
>> > >> Updates regarding my test with Storm 2.6.0 Snapshot 2023/11/02:
>> > >>  1. I have modified my KO bolts using this pattern in their prepare() 
>> > >> method:
>> > >>
>> > >>long cacheMaxSize =
>> > >> Long.parseLong(stormConf.get(ConfKeys.SVC_DEF_CACHE_SIZE).toString());
>> > >>
>> > >>instead of:
>> > >>
>> > >>long cacheMaxSize = (Long) 
>> > >> stormConf.get(ConfKeys.SVC_DEF_CACHE_SIZE);
>> > >>
>> > >> 2. I have found the cause of the regression in loss of 'Storm UI'
>> > >> title at the top left-hand side of all Storm UI's pages.
>> > >> This is a mistake of mine in this PR:
>> > >> 
>> > >> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3580/commits/0320ee6f2d367086b973b504a976ae6aff853ccd
>> > >> More precisely, at line 19 of this file:
>> > >> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3580/commits/0320ee6f2d367086b973b504a976ae6aff853ccd#diff-6d3a4162a8af826a25a2b8cd6763c08e9bc5165b736b45890b84fa50597d7481
>> > >> we must have:
>> > >> {{title}}
>> > >>
>> > >> instead of:
>> > >>
>> > >> {{ui.title}}
>> > >>
>> > >>I think I missed this during my tests because of browser's cache
>> > >> (bad excuse, I know...): probably I tested by-patching my deployed
>> > >> Storm cluster, and I finally forgot to checkout this latest change of
>> > >> my delivery.
>> > >>
>> > >>I had to use "private navigation" to make sure this time it fixes 
>> > >> this issue
>> > >>
>> > >> What would be the quickest way for this very simple fix to be delivered 
>> > >> ?
>> > >>
>> > >> Thanks,
>> > >> Alexandre
>> > >>
>> > >> Le ven. 3 nov. 2023 à 20:57, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
>> > >>  a écrit :
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Thanks Richard for the analysis.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > My thought on this are very simple: let me fix my own old code, after
>> > >> > all this was impacting only one of my topologies, the other one were
>> > >> > using more careful Integer.parseInt or Integer.parseLong to avoid
>> > >> > making assumption on the way the values in the config Map were
>> > >> > serialized.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > My other concern with 2.6.0 Snapshot is that in Storm UI, the "Storm
>> > >> > UI" title at the top left hand side of each page is missing. This may
>> > >> > be the result of one of my own PR, I'll have to check why...
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Alex
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Le ven. 3 nov. 2023 à 20:23, Richard Zowalla  a 
>> > >> > écrit :
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Hi,
>> > >> > >
>> > >>

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT

[Richard Zowalla]

Just push a fix for it (referencing the original issue) ;-) - we hadn't a 
release in between, so not a big deal.

Am 4. November 2023 08:01:54 MEZ schrieb Alexandre Vermeerbergen 
:
>Temporary workaround for the Storm UI title's regression: run this
>command on the title-template.html file (in
>storm-stable/public/templates directory) after having extracted the
>binary archive:
>
>sed -i 's/{{ui\.title}}/{{title}}/' title-template.html
>
>Again sorry for having introduced this regression.
>
>Alexandre
>
>Le sam. 4 nov. 2023 à 07:52, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> a écrit :
>>
>> Updates regarding my test with Storm 2.6.0 Snapshot 2023/11/02:
>>  1. I have modified my KO bolts using this pattern in their prepare() method:
>>
>>long cacheMaxSize =
>> Long.parseLong(stormConf.get(ConfKeys.SVC_DEF_CACHE_SIZE).toString());
>>
>>instead of:
>>
>>long cacheMaxSize = (Long) stormConf.get(ConfKeys.SVC_DEF_CACHE_SIZE);
>>
>> 2. I have found the cause of the regression in loss of 'Storm UI'
>> title at the top left-hand side of all Storm UI's pages.
>> This is a mistake of mine in this PR:
>> 
>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3580/commits/0320ee6f2d367086b973b504a976ae6aff853ccd
>> More precisely, at line 19 of this file:
>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3580/commits/0320ee6f2d367086b973b504a976ae6aff853ccd#diff-6d3a4162a8af826a25a2b8cd6763c08e9bc5165b736b45890b84fa50597d7481
>> we must have:
>> {{title}}
>>
>> instead of:
>>
>> {{ui.title}}
>>
>>I think I missed this during my tests because of browser's cache
>> (bad excuse, I know...): probably I tested by-patching my deployed
>> Storm cluster, and I finally forgot to checkout this latest change of
>> my delivery.
>>
>>I had to use "private navigation" to make sure this time it fixes this 
>> issue
>>
>> What would be the quickest way for this very simple fix to be delivered ?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alexandre
>>
>> Le ven. 3 nov. 2023 à 20:57, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
>>  a écrit :
>> >
>> > Thanks Richard for the analysis.
>> >
>> > My thought on this are very simple: let me fix my own old code, after
>> > all this was impacting only one of my topologies, the other one were
>> > using more careful Integer.parseInt or Integer.parseLong to avoid
>> > making assumption on the way the values in the config Map were
>> > serialized.
>> >
>> > My other concern with 2.6.0 Snapshot is that in Storm UI, the "Storm
>> > UI" title at the top left hand side of each page is missing. This may
>> > be the result of one of my own PR, I'll have to check why...
>> >
>> > Alex
>> >
>> > Le ven. 3 nov. 2023 à 20:23, Richard Zowalla  a écrit :
>> > >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > thanks for the feedback.
>> > >
>> > > The main difference to 2.5.0 is, that we switched the JSON
>> > > implementation in Utils, which relied on a
>> > > super old JSON library. What is happening here is, that the new JSON
>> > > library (net.minidev) behaves differently.
>> > >
>> > > We can see it by writing some simple code without Storm (The related
>> > > code line with the parsing is taken from Storm Utils)
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Map conf = new HashMap<>();
>> > > conf.put("test", 1L);
>> > >
>> > > Map deserTopoConf = (Map)
>> > > JSONValue.parseWithException(JSONValue.toJSONString(conf));
>> > >
>> > > for(Map.Entry e : deserTopoConf.entrySet()) {
>> > >   System.out.println(e.getValue().getClass().getSimpleName());
>> > > }
>> > >
>> > > This will print "Integer". Using "1L" as a value will
>> > > result in "Long".
>> > >
>> > > The main issue derives from the fact, that we serialize the config map
>> > > into a JSON String and parse the result.
>> > > Based on the String representation, "1L" will still fit into an
>> > > Integer, so the parser will not use Long ;-)
>> > >
>> > > If the number is big enough, the parser will switch to a Long.
>> > > The old library (> 10 years old now):
>> > >
>> > > deserTopoConf = (Map)
>> > > org.json.simple.JSONValue.parseWithEx

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT

[Richard Zowalla]

     super.prepare(stormConf, context);
> > 
> >     this.redisPort   =
> > Integer.parseInt((String)
> > stormConf.get(ConfKeys.REDIS_PORT));
> > 
> > That said, I can modify the code of "MyKOBolt" to use same
> > Integer.parseInt  or Integer.parseLong trick, but it's the first
> > time
> > in my long history of upgrades that I have seen such runtime
> > incompatibility.
> > 
> > Maybe "MyKOBolt" was badly written since the beginning and I have
> > just
> > hit the punishment for it: is there a documentation which clarifies
> > datatypes of the Map argument of prepare() method?
> > 
> > Also worth noting: "MyKOBolt" derives from BaseRichBolt , while
> > "MyOKBolt" derives from BaseBasicBolt => could this have any impact
> > on
> > this finding ?
> > 
> > Last, I'm running this on Redhat Linux 8 and IBM Semeru JDK
> > 17.0.8.1.
> > 
> > Kind regards,
> > Alexandre
> > 
> > Le ven. 3 nov. 2023 à 15:16, Julien Nioche
> >  a écrit :
> > > 
> > > Thanks Richard.
> > > 
> > > Tried the latest snapshot with StormCrawler both in local and
> > > deployed mode
> > > and did not find any issues.
> > > Will try it on a topology generating WARC files next week to
> > > check that the
> > > dependency changes on Hadoop have not broken anything.
> > > 
> > > Have a good week end
> > > 
> > > Julien
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 19:25, Richard Zowalla 
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Short update. Sorted out an issue with the tar.gz/zip with
> > > > Julien today
> > > > and re-uploaded them to the nightlies area.
> > > > 
> > > > This new bundle works as expected in my deployment but happy to
> > > > receive
> > > > additional feedback before getting up a first release candidate
> > > > ;-)
> > > > 
> > > > Am Montag, dem 30.10.2023 um 08:21 +0100 schrieb Richard
> > > > Zowalla:
> > > > > Hi Alexandre,
> > > > > 
> > > > > we are not in a hurry here :) - take as much as time you
> > > > > need.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Gruß
> > > > > Richard
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Am Montag, dem 30.10.2023 um 07:50 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
> > > > > Vermeerbergen:
> > > > > > Hello Richard,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Okay, I'm more than happy to do that with my pre-production
> > > > > > cluster
> > > > > > (~10 topologies) using the binary artifacts.
> > > > > > Would it be OK if I can use up to end of this week  so that
> > > > > > I'll be
> > > > > > able to have enough time to check all potential issues that
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > upgrade bring?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Alexandre
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Le lun. 30 oct. 2023 à 07:35, Richard Zowalla
> > > > > >  a
> > > > > > écrit :
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > before starting a release of 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT, I would like
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > receive
> > > > > > > some feedback on the current SNAPSHOT build.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I just uploaded a 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT of Storm build from
> > > > > > > 
> > > > https://github.com/apache/storm/commit/8f883086032669a8f04b09a3b312d60af5b44533
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > It is available via the ASF Snapshot repository:
> > > > > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > You can consume by adding
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > >  
> > > > > > >   apache.snapshots
> > > > > > >   Apache Snapshot Repository
> > > > > > >   https://repository.apache.org/snapshots
> > > > > > >   
> > > > > > >     false
> > > > > > >   
> > > > > > >  
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > to your project pom. As we do not deploy SNAPSHOTS
> > > > > > > automatically,
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > should be easy to just consume the latest SNAPSHOT.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > The packaged binaries are available at
> > > > > > > nightlies.apache.org:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > https://nightlies.apache.org/storm/2.6.0-SNAPSHOT/8f883086032669a8f04b09a3b312d60af5b44533/
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > If you have some minutes left: Please test and report any
> > > > > > > issues
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > this binaries, so we can fix before attempting to
> > > > > > > release.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > The most significant changes are in the are of
> > > > > > > hadoop/hbase/hdfs
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > upgraded from 2.x to 3.x - our own test coverage within
> > > > > > > the build
> > > > > > > looks
> > > > > > > good but would be  nice to get some real world use-case
> > > > > > > feedback
> > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > this. In addition, we had quite a lof of 3rd party
> > > > > > > dependency
> > > > > > > upgrades.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > In addition, it contains the pruning of external modules
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > listed
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3988
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > A summaryin Jira is here:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314820=12353484
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Gruß
> > > > > > > Richard
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > --
> > > 
> > > *Open Source Solutions for Text Engineering*
> > > 
> > > http://www.digitalpebble.com
> > > http://digitalpebble.blogspot.com/
> > > #digitalpebble <http://twitter.com/digitalpebble>

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT

[Richard Zowalla]

Short update. Sorted out an issue with the tar.gz/zip with Julien today
and re-uploaded them to the nightlies area.

This new bundle works as expected in my deployment but happy to receive
additional feedback before getting up a first release candidate ;-)

Am Montag, dem 30.10.2023 um 08:21 +0100 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> Hi Alexandre,
> 
> we are not in a hurry here :) - take as much as time you need.
> 
> Gruß
> Richard
> 
> 
> Am Montag, dem 30.10.2023 um 07:50 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
> Vermeerbergen:
> > Hello Richard,
> > 
> > Okay, I'm more than happy to do that with my pre-production cluster
> > (~10 topologies) using the binary artifacts.
> > Would it be OK if I can use up to end of this week  so that I'll be
> > able to have enough time to check all potential issues that this
> > upgrade bring?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Alexandre
> > 
> > Le lun. 30 oct. 2023 à 07:35, Richard Zowalla  a
> > écrit :
> > > 
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > before starting a release of 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT, I would like to
> > > receive
> > > some feedback on the current SNAPSHOT build.
> > > 
> > > I just uploaded a 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT of Storm build from
> > > https://github.com/apache/storm/commit/8f883086032669a8f04b09a3b312d60af5b44533
> > > 
> > > It is available via the ASF Snapshot repository:
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/
> > > 
> > > You can consume by adding
> > > 
> > >  
> > >   apache.snapshots
> > >   Apache Snapshot Repository
> > >   https://repository.apache.org/snapshots
> > >   
> > >     false
> > >   
> > >  
> > > 
> > > to your project pom. As we do not deploy SNAPSHOTS automatically,
> > > it
> > > should be easy to just consume the latest SNAPSHOT.
> > > 
> > > The packaged binaries are available at nightlies.apache.org:
> > > 
> > > https://nightlies.apache.org/storm/2.6.0-SNAPSHOT/8f883086032669a8f04b09a3b312d60af5b44533/
> > > 
> > > If you have some minutes left: Please test and report any issues
> > > with
> > > this binaries, so we can fix before attempting to release.
> > > 
> > > The most significant changes are in the are of hadoop/hbase/hdfs
> > > as
> > > we
> > > upgraded from 2.x to 3.x - our own test coverage within the build
> > > looks
> > > good but would be  nice to get some real world use-case feedback
> > > on
> > > this. In addition, we had quite a lof of 3rd party dependency
> > > upgrades.
> > > 
> > > In addition, it contains the pruning of external modules as
> > > listed
> > > in
> > > 
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3988
> > > 
> > > A summaryin Jira is here:
> > > 
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314820=12353484
> > > 
> > > Gruß
> > > Richard
> > > 
> > > 
> 

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi Alexandre,

we are not in a hurry here :) - take as much as time you need.

Gruß
Richard


Am Montag, dem 30.10.2023 um 07:50 +0100 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Hello Richard,
> 
> Okay, I'm more than happy to do that with my pre-production cluster
> (~10 topologies) using the binary artifacts.
> Would it be OK if I can use up to end of this week  so that I'll be
> able to have enough time to check all potential issues that this
> upgrade bring?
> 
> Thanks,
> Alexandre
> 
> Le lun. 30 oct. 2023 à 07:35, Richard Zowalla  a
> écrit :
> > 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > before starting a release of 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT, I would like to
> > receive
> > some feedback on the current SNAPSHOT build.
> > 
> > I just uploaded a 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT of Storm build from
> > https://github.com/apache/storm/commit/8f883086032669a8f04b09a3b312d60af5b44533
> > 
> > It is available via the ASF Snapshot repository:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/
> > 
> > You can consume by adding
> > 
> >  
> >   apache.snapshots
> >   Apache Snapshot Repository
> >   https://repository.apache.org/snapshots
> >   
> >     false
> >   
> >  
> > 
> > to your project pom. As we do not deploy SNAPSHOTS automatically,
> > it
> > should be easy to just consume the latest SNAPSHOT.
> > 
> > The packaged binaries are available at nightlies.apache.org:
> > 
> > https://nightlies.apache.org/storm/2.6.0-SNAPSHOT/8f883086032669a8f04b09a3b312d60af5b44533/
> > 
> > If you have some minutes left: Please test and report any issues
> > with
> > this binaries, so we can fix before attempting to release.
> > 
> > The most significant changes are in the are of hadoop/hbase/hdfs as
> > we
> > upgraded from 2.x to 3.x - our own test coverage within the build
> > looks
> > good but would be  nice to get some real world use-case feedback on
> > this. In addition, we had quite a lof of 3rd party dependency
> > upgrades.
> > 
> > In addition, it contains the pruning of external modules as listed
> > in
> > 
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3988
> > 
> > A summaryin Jira is here:
> > 
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314820=12353484
> > 
> > Gruß
> > Richard
> > 
> > 



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[HELP NEEDED] Please test 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

before starting a release of 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT, I would like to receive
some feedback on the current SNAPSHOT build.

I just uploaded a 2.6.0-SNAPSHOT of Storm build from
https://github.com/apache/storm/commit/8f883086032669a8f04b09a3b312d60af5b44533

It is available via the ASF Snapshot repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/

You can consume by adding

 
  apache.snapshots
  Apache Snapshot Repository
  https://repository.apache.org/snapshots
  
false
  
 

to your project pom. As we do not deploy SNAPSHOTS automatically, it
should be easy to just consume the latest SNAPSHOT.

The packaged binaries are available at nightlies.apache.org:

https://nightlies.apache.org/storm/2.6.0-SNAPSHOT/8f883086032669a8f04b09a3b312d60af5b44533/

If you have some minutes left: Please test and report any issues with
this binaries, so we can fix before attempting to release. 

The most significant changes are in the are of hadoop/hbase/hdfs as we
upgraded from 2.x to 3.x - our own test coverage within the build looks
good but would be  nice to get some real world use-case feedback on
this. In addition, we had quite a lof of 3rd party dependency upgrades.

In addition, it contains the pruning of external modules as listed in 

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3988

A summaryin Jira is here:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314820=12353484

Gruß
Richard

Release ?

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi,

we made a lot of improvements / dependency updates since our last
release?

Any objections for doing a new release?

Gruß
Richard


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[HELP WANTED] storm-sql / calcite

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

since our survey + vote included storm-sql and it remained untouched, I
am wondering if anyone can have a look at

https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3509

It fails due to compile issues from calcite 1.16.0 to 1.32.0 and need
some adjustment.

Do we have any volunteers to give it a try?

Gruß
Richard

[VOTE] [RESULT] Removal of modules residing in /external (2nd attempt)

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

this vote passes with the following +1

Alexandre Vermeerbergen (binding)
Julien Nioche (binding)
Richard Zowalla (binding)

I'll prepare a Jira + PR for the change.

Gruß
Richard

Am Donnerstag, dem 12.10.2023 um 10:59 +0200 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> Hello all,
> 
> This is the 2nd attempt due to an oversight in the components to be
> voted on.
> 
> A few weeks ago we conducted a survey [1] and discussed the results
> [2]. Corresponding details about the background can be found there.
> The
> short version: We have too few resources to keep all modules up to
> date. Old dependencies make it difficult to update the project.
> 
> Now it's time for us to make an appropriate decision. For the sake of
> simplicity, let's vote on the whole package. If there are differences
> (ie. a VETO for this code change), we can still vote per module.
> 
> Please keep in mind that corresponding modules can also exist outside
> the main project (e.g. as a fork). A removed module can also be added
> back at some point if it is updated and maintained appropriately. 
> 
> We are voting on the following proposal:
> 
> Remove the following external components:
> 
> - storm-cassandra
> - storm-eventhubs
> - storm-hbase
> - storm-hive
> - storm-kinesis
> - storm-mongodb
> - storm-mqtt
> - storm-openmtsdb
> - storm-pmml
> - storm-pulsar
> - storm-rocketmq
> - storm-solr
> 
> Keep the following components:
> 
> - storm-autocreds (required by UI)
> - storm-blobstore-migration
> - storm-elasticsearch
> - storm-jdbc
> - storm-hdfs-*
> - storm-jms
> - storm-kafka-*
> - storm-metrics
> - storm-redis
> 
> 
> "How to vote" on code modification is described here:
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#votes-on-code-modification
> 
> Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
> vote. The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
> 
> Please note: A -1 vote by a qualified voter (PMC) stops a code-
> modification proposal in its tracks. This constitutes a veto, and it
> cannot be overruled nor overridden by anyone. Vetoes stand until and
> unless the individual withdraws their veto. To prevent vetoes from
> being used capriciously, the voter must provide with the veto a
> technical justification showing why the change is bad (opens a
> security
> exposure, negatively affects performance, etc. ). A veto without a
> justification is invalid and has no weight.
> 
> 
> Please VOTE on the removal of the modules mentioned above. The vote
> is
> open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed.
> 
> Please vote:
> 
> [ ] +1 Remove the modules mentioned above
> [ ]  0 No opinion
> [ ] -1 Do NOT remove because {VETO REASON}
> 
> Gruß
> Richard
> 
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/f0396c98ttt1688ys9jlxd3wx3ykvch4
> [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/s7nsrq4byn7z1b4504l8hy7vlj7f0bpl
> 

Re: [VOTE] Removal of modules residing in /external (2nd attempt)

[Richard Zowalla]

Here is my own +1

Am Donnerstag, dem 12.10.2023 um 10:59 +0200 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> Hello all,
> 
> This is the 2nd attempt due to an oversight in the components to be
> voted on.
> 
> A few weeks ago we conducted a survey [1] and discussed the results
> [2]. Corresponding details about the background can be found there.
> The
> short version: We have too few resources to keep all modules up to
> date. Old dependencies make it difficult to update the project.
> 
> Now it's time for us to make an appropriate decision. For the sake of
> simplicity, let's vote on the whole package. If there are differences
> (ie. a VETO for this code change), we can still vote per module.
> 
> Please keep in mind that corresponding modules can also exist outside
> the main project (e.g. as a fork). A removed module can also be added
> back at some point if it is updated and maintained appropriately. 
> 
> We are voting on the following proposal:
> 
> Remove the following external components:
> 
> - storm-cassandra
> - storm-eventhubs
> - storm-hbase
> - storm-hive
> - storm-kinesis
> - storm-mongodb
> - storm-mqtt
> - storm-openmtsdb
> - storm-pmml
> - storm-pulsar
> - storm-rocketmq
> - storm-solr
> 
> Keep the following components:
> 
> - storm-autocreds (required by UI)
> - storm-blobstore-migration
> - storm-elasticsearch
> - storm-jdbc
> - storm-hdfs-*
> - storm-jms
> - storm-kafka-*
> - storm-metrics
> - storm-redis
> 
> 
> "How to vote" on code modification is described here:
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#votes-on-code-modification
> 
> Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
> vote. The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
> 
> Please note: A -1 vote by a qualified voter (PMC) stops a code-
> modification proposal in its tracks. This constitutes a veto, and it
> cannot be overruled nor overridden by anyone. Vetoes stand until and
> unless the individual withdraws their veto. To prevent vetoes from
> being used capriciously, the voter must provide with the veto a
> technical justification showing why the change is bad (opens a
> security
> exposure, negatively affects performance, etc. ). A veto without a
> justification is invalid and has no weight.
> 
> 
> Please VOTE on the removal of the modules mentioned above. The vote
> is
> open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed.
> 
> Please vote:
> 
> [ ] +1 Remove the modules mentioned above
> [ ]  0 No opinion
> [ ] -1 Do NOT remove because {VETO REASON}
> 
> Gruß
> Richard
> 
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/f0396c98ttt1688ys9jlxd3wx3ykvch4
> [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/s7nsrq4byn7z1b4504l8hy7vlj7f0bpl
> 

[VOTE] Removal of modules residing in /external (2nd attempt)

[Richard Zowalla]

Hello all,

This is the 2nd attempt due to an oversight in the components to be
voted on.

A few weeks ago we conducted a survey [1] and discussed the results
[2]. Corresponding details about the background can be found there. The
short version: We have too few resources to keep all modules up to
date. Old dependencies make it difficult to update the project.

Now it's time for us to make an appropriate decision. For the sake of
simplicity, let's vote on the whole package. If there are differences
(ie. a VETO for this code change), we can still vote per module.

Please keep in mind that corresponding modules can also exist outside
the main project (e.g. as a fork). A removed module can also be added
back at some point if it is updated and maintained appropriately. 

We are voting on the following proposal:

Remove the following external components:

- storm-cassandra
- storm-eventhubs
- storm-hbase
- storm-hive
- storm-kinesis
- storm-mongodb
- storm-mqtt
- storm-openmtsdb
- storm-pmml
- storm-pulsar
- storm-rocketmq
- storm-solr

Keep the following components:

- storm-autocreds (required by UI)
- storm-blobstore-migration
- storm-elasticsearch
- storm-jdbc
- storm-hdfs-*
- storm-jms
- storm-kafka-*
- storm-metrics
- storm-redis


"How to vote" on code modification is described here:
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#votes-on-code-modification

Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
vote. The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.

Please note: A -1 vote by a qualified voter (PMC) stops a code-
modification proposal in its tracks. This constitutes a veto, and it
cannot be overruled nor overridden by anyone. Vetoes stand until and
unless the individual withdraws their veto. To prevent vetoes from
being used capriciously, the voter must provide with the veto a
technical justification showing why the change is bad (opens a security
exposure, negatively affects performance, etc. ). A veto without a
justification is invalid and has no weight.


Please VOTE on the removal of the modules mentioned above. The vote is
open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed.

Please vote:

[ ] +1 Remove the modules mentioned above
[ ]  0 No opinion
[ ] -1 Do NOT remove because {VETO REASON}

Gruß
Richard

[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/f0396c98ttt1688ys9jlxd3wx3ykvch4
[2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/s7nsrq4byn7z1b4504l8hy7vlj7f0bpl



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[CANCEL] [VOTE] Removal of modules residing in /external

[Richard Zowalla]

Due to an oversight on my side, I need to re-roll this vote.
"storm-jdbc" had enough votes to be still included. Will follow up
shortly.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [VOTE] Removal of modules residing in /external

[Richard Zowalla]

Good point. 

Actually, the storm-jdbc component had enough votes (4+) to still be
considered relevant. It was a oversighton my side (sorry for that). I
will cancel this vote and do a re-roll (just to make sure, that we do
not vote on something, which won't happen.





Am Donnerstag, dem 12.10.2023 um 09:12 +0100 schrieb Edward Armes:
> -1 (non-binding)
>  I would maybe think about keeping JDBC connector and dropping the
> Redis
> connector as the JDBC connector could potentially include Redis.
> 
> Edward
> 
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023, 08:33 Richard Zowalla,  wrote:
> 
> > Hello all,
> > 
> > A few weeks ago we conducted a survey [1] and discussed the results
> > [2]. Corresponding details about the background can be found there.
> > The
> > short version: We have too few resources to keep all modules up to
> > date. Old dependencies make it difficult to update the project.
> > 
> > Now it's time for us to make an appropriate decision. For the sake
> > of
> > simplicity, let's vote on the whole package. If there are
> > differences
> > (ie. a VETO for this code change), we can still vote per module.
> > 
> > Please keep in mind that corresponding modules can also exist
> > outside
> > the main project (e.g. as a fork). A removed module can also be
> > added
> > back at some point if it is updated and maintained appropriately.
> > 
> > We are voting on the following proposal:
> > 
> > Remove the following external components:
> > 
> > - storm-cassandra
> > - storm-eventhubs
> > - storm-hbase
> > - storm-hive
> > - storm-jdbc
> > - storm-kinesis
> > - storm-mongodb
> > - storm-mqtt
> > - storm-openmtsdb
> > - storm-pmml
> > - storm-pulsar
> > - storm-rocketmq
> > - storm-solr
> > 
> > Keep the following components:
> > 
> > - storm-autocreds
> > - storm-blobstore-migration
> > - storm-hdfs-*
> > - storm-jms
> > - storm-kafka-*
> > - storm-metrics
> > - storm-redis
> > 
> > 
> > "How to vote" on code modification is described here:
> > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#votes-on-code-modification
> > 
> > Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome
> > to
> > vote. The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
> > 
> > Please note: A -1 vote by a qualified voter (PMC) stops a code-
> > modification proposal in its tracks. This constitutes a veto, and
> > it
> > cannot be overruled nor overridden by anyone. Vetoes stand until
> > and
> > unless the individual withdraws their veto. To prevent vetoes from
> > being used capriciously, the voter must provide with the veto a
> > technical justification showing why the change is bad (opens a
> > security
> > exposure, negatively affects performance, etc. ). A veto without a
> > justification is invalid and has no weight.
> > 
> > 
> > Please VOTE on the removal of the modules mentioned above. The vote
> > is
> > open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed.
> > 
> > Please vote:
> > 
> > [ ] +1 Remove the modules mentioned above
> > [ ]  0 No opinion
> > [ ] -1 Do NOT remove because {VETO REASON}
> > 
> > Gruß
> > Richard
> > 
> > [1]
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/f0396c98ttt1688ys9jlxd3wx3ykvch4
> > [2]
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/s7nsrq4byn7z1b4504l8hy7vlj7f0bpl
> > 



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[VOTE] Removal of modules residing in /external

[Richard Zowalla]

Hello all,

A few weeks ago we conducted a survey [1] and discussed the results
[2]. Corresponding details about the background can be found there. The
short version: We have too few resources to keep all modules up to
date. Old dependencies make it difficult to update the project.

Now it's time for us to make an appropriate decision. For the sake of
simplicity, let's vote on the whole package. If there are differences
(ie. a VETO for this code change), we can still vote per module.

Please keep in mind that corresponding modules can also exist outside
the main project (e.g. as a fork). A removed module can also be added
back at some point if it is updated and maintained appropriately. 

We are voting on the following proposal:

Remove the following external components:

- storm-cassandra
- storm-eventhubs
- storm-hbase
- storm-hive
- storm-jdbc
- storm-kinesis
- storm-mongodb
- storm-mqtt
- storm-openmtsdb
- storm-pmml
- storm-pulsar
- storm-rocketmq
- storm-solr

Keep the following components:

- storm-autocreds
- storm-blobstore-migration
- storm-hdfs-*
- storm-jms
- storm-kafka-*
- storm-metrics
- storm-redis


"How to vote" on code modification is described here:
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#votes-on-code-modification

Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to
vote. The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.

Please note: A -1 vote by a qualified voter (PMC) stops a code-
modification proposal in its tracks. This constitutes a veto, and it
cannot be overruled nor overridden by anyone. Vetoes stand until and
unless the individual withdraws their veto. To prevent vetoes from
being used capriciously, the voter must provide with the veto a
technical justification showing why the change is bad (opens a security
exposure, negatively affects performance, etc. ). A veto without a
justification is invalid and has no weight.


Please VOTE on the removal of the modules mentioned above. The vote is
open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed.

Please vote:

[ ] +1 Remove the modules mentioned above
[ ]  0 No opinion
[ ] -1 Do NOT remove because {VETO REASON}

Gruß
Richard

[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/f0396c98ttt1688ys9jlxd3wx3ykvch4
[2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/s7nsrq4byn7z1b4504l8hy7vlj7f0bpl

Re: [DISCUSS] Future of /external modules -> next steps?

[Richard Zowalla]

I agree with both of you (Alexandra + Julien).

However, I would also like to remove cassandra. It is still stuck with
Java 11 and Bipin and myself did some significant efforts in order to
update that module to a newer version without success. It could be
moved to a separate repo or just removed. If some one is keen in
developing / moving the code forward, we can re-integrate it some day.

Regarding the formalities a proposal:

- I will sent a mail to user@ to allow users to notice this discussion
on the dev list, if they aren't subscribed.

- Let's wait for some more days if someone jumps into the discussion
and afterwards we can go for a VOTE proposal.

Gruß
Richard



Am Dienstag, dem 03.10.2023 um 21:59 +0200 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> I agree with Julien.
> 
> Le mar. 3 oct. 2023 à 09:20, Julien Nioche
>  a écrit :
> > 
> > Hi
> > 
> > Thanks Richard. There are some dubious votes indeed.
> > 
> > My views is that we could keep only the modules with 4 votes or
> > more :
> > cassandra, elasticsearch, hdfs-*, jms, kafka*, metrics, redis
> > 
> > The rest can be removed. If people feel strongly about them, they
> > can
> > always copy the code and maintain it in external repos (which can
> > of course
> > be contributed back later on if they prove to be popular).
> > Given the low number of active committers on the project, any
> > reduction on
> > the size of the code or number of dependencies to maintain is a
> > good thing.
> > 
> > Julien
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 at 07:04, Richard Zowalla 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > our survey is closed and here are the results. We only have a
> > > sample
> > > size of n=11, which isn't great but somehow represents the
> > > current
> > > state of Storm (just revived from the Attic).
> > > 
> > > You find the results here: [1] (csv + image). User comments are
> > > also
> > > added to the gist.
> > > 
> > > We had some votes from people, who aren't using Storm at the
> > > moment and
> > > just need a technical comparison between Storm, Flink and Spark
> > > to
> > > decide, which one to use. Therefore, it seems, that they marked
> > > every
> > > module as "must have" ;-) - as a take-a-way: it might be good to
> > > provide such comparison on our website.
> > > 
> > > We should discuss, which modules are worth being kept in the main
> > > repository and which modules can be extracted (for example into a
> > > "storm-external" repository).
> > > 
> > > Due to the tight coupling for security (in the UI), we need to
> > > keep the
> > > hadoop-related stuff. Kafka things are also a thing, it seems.
> > > 
> > > Some of the moduels are used by (new) PMC members, so they might
> > > have
> > > the energy to start an update initiative on these modules.
> > > 
> > > Happy to hear your thoughts!
> > > 
> > > Gruß
> > > Richard
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > [1] https://gist.github.com/rzo1/2a1d20acfc20da050ea515770c6606df
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > 
> > *Open Source Solutions for Text Engineering*
> > 
> > http://www.digitalpebble.com
> > http://digitalpebble.blogspot.com/
> > #digitalpebble <http://twitter.com/digitalpebble>

[DISCUSS] Future of /external modules -> next steps?

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

our survey is closed and here are the results. We only have a sample
size of n=11, which isn't great but somehow represents the current
state of Storm (just revived from the Attic). 

You find the results here: [1] (csv + image). User comments are also
added to the gist.

We had some votes from people, who aren't using Storm at the moment and
just need a technical comparison between Storm, Flink and Spark to
decide, which one to use. Therefore, it seems, that they marked every
module as "must have" ;-) - as a take-a-way: it might be good to
provide such comparison on our website.

We should discuss, which modules are worth being kept in the main
repository and which modules can be extracted (for example into a
"storm-external" repository). 

Due to the tight coupling for security (in the UI), we need to keep the
hadoop-related stuff. Kafka things are also a thing, it seems. 

Some of the moduels are used by (new) PMC members, so they might have
the energy to start an update initiative on these modules.

Happy to hear your thoughts!

Gruß
Richard



[1] https://gist.github.com/rzo1/2a1d20acfc20da050ea515770c6606df

Re: How about javax to jakarta migration in Storm?

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi,

yes, the coordinate move came with EE9, although EE8 will still be around some 
day.

It will require to update Jetty _and_ check transient dependencies for 
compatibility. I didn't check but it might be that some auth libs (from hadoop) 
might rely on javax dependencies causing issues at runtime.

Nothing against a Jira to track.

Gruß
Richard 



Am 28. September 2023 15:34:36 MESZ schrieb Alexandre Vermeerbergen 
:
>Hello,
>
>I noticed we still rely on javax.servlet in storm-server/pom.xml.
>
>Unless I am missing something, Java EE" APIs are supposed to be
>deprecated in favor in Jakarta EE APIs.
>
>While I don't know the scope of needed changes in Storm to move to
>Jakarta EE APIs, is there any objection if I create a JIRA to track
>such change (potentially needing Jettty update, etc) ?
>
>Having a look to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3961, I
>see that Richard had this topic in mind, but I found no STORM JIRA
>explicitly meaning "Upgrade to Jarkarta EE APIs"
>
>Thanks,
>Alexandre

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Future of external Storm modules

[Richard Zowalla]

Just a last friendly reminder to participate! :)

Am Mittwoch, dem 30.08.2023 um 09:31 +0200 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> Dear Apache Storm Users,
> 
> we would like to update you on recent discussions regarding the
> future
> of the Apache Storm project and its modules. As you may be aware,
> there
> was a discussion to move Apache Storm to the attic due to resource
> limitations and waning community involvement. However, we are pleased
> to share that Storm will continue under the Apache Umbrella as a top
> level project.
> 
> To ensure the sustainability and vitality of Apache Storm, we are now
> focusing our efforts on maintaining the Storm 2.x series. However, in
> order to streamline our development process and allocate resources
> efficiently, we must address some challenges posed by less active
> previously community-maintained modules.
> 
> Within the /external directory of the Apache Storm repository, there
> are various modules that were once actively maintained by community
> members, but over time, their activity has diminished. These modules
> have placed a strain on the overall development process, and we
> believe
> it's important to assess their current relevance to the community.
> 
> You can find the list of these modules at the following link: 
> 
> https://github.com/apache/storm/tree/master/external
> 
> ## Call for Your Input
> 
> To assess the actual usage and necessity of these modules, we have
> created a GDPR-compliant survey. Your feedback is crucial in helping
> us
> determine which modules are actively used and which ones may need to
> be
> deprecated. Your input will greatly influence our decisions moving
> forward.
> 
> ## Access the Survey
> 
> We kindly ask you to participate in the survey by indicating whether
> you are currently using any of the modules listed in the /external
> directory. If you believe that a specific module is still essential,
> we
> encourage you to consider contributing to its maintenance.
> 
> Here is the link to the survey:
> 
> https://terminplaner4.dfn.de/EYNJzD9U64UFGOGq
> 
> The survey is open till 30/09/2023 23:59 UTC 
> 
> Of course, you can also just reply to this mail with your preference.
> We will share the results after the survey is closed.
> 
> ## Get Involved
> 
> If you are passionate about any of the modules that are on the verge
> of
> being deprecated, this is your opportunity to step up and contribute.
> Your involvement will not only ensure the continued existence of
> these
> modules but also contribute to the overall health of the Apache Storm
> ecosystem.
> 
> Thanks in advance!
> 
> 
> 

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Future of external Storm modules

[Richard Zowalla]

Just another friendly reminder to participate! :)

Am Mittwoch, dem 30.08.2023 um 09:31 +0200 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> Dear Apache Storm Users,
> 
> we would like to update you on recent discussions regarding the
> future
> of the Apache Storm project and its modules. As you may be aware,
> there
> was a discussion to move Apache Storm to the attic due to resource
> limitations and waning community involvement. However, we are pleased
> to share that Storm will continue under the Apache Umbrella as a top
> level project.
> 
> To ensure the sustainability and vitality of Apache Storm, we are now
> focusing our efforts on maintaining the Storm 2.x series. However, in
> order to streamline our development process and allocate resources
> efficiently, we must address some challenges posed by less active
> previously community-maintained modules.
> 
> Within the /external directory of the Apache Storm repository, there
> are various modules that were once actively maintained by community
> members, but over time, their activity has diminished. These modules
> have placed a strain on the overall development process, and we
> believe
> it's important to assess their current relevance to the community.
> 
> You can find the list of these modules at the following link: 
> 
> https://github.com/apache/storm/tree/master/external
> 
> ## Call for Your Input
> 
> To assess the actual usage and necessity of these modules, we have
> created a GDPR-compliant survey. Your feedback is crucial in helping
> us
> determine which modules are actively used and which ones may need to
> be
> deprecated. Your input will greatly influence our decisions moving
> forward.
> 
> ## Access the Survey
> 
> We kindly ask you to participate in the survey by indicating whether
> you are currently using any of the modules listed in the /external
> directory. If you believe that a specific module is still essential,
> we
> encourage you to consider contributing to its maintenance.
> 
> Here is the link to the survey:
> 
> https://terminplaner4.dfn.de/EYNJzD9U64UFGOGq
> 
> The survey is open till 30/09/2023 23:59 UTC 
> 
> Of course, you can also just reply to this mail with your preference.
> We will share the results after the survey is closed.
> 
> ## Get Involved
> 
> If you are passionate about any of the modules that are on the verge
> of
> being deprecated, this is your opportunity to step up and contribute.
> Your involvement will not only ensure the continued existence of
> these
> modules but also contribute to the overall health of the Apache Storm
> ecosystem.
> 
> Thanks in advance!
> 
> 
> 

Re: [HELP NEEDED] Future of external Storm modules

[Richard Zowalla]

Just a friendly reminder to participate! :)


Am Mittwoch, dem 30.08.2023 um 09:31 +0200 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> Dear Apache Storm Users,
> 
> we would like to update you on recent discussions regarding the
> future
> of the Apache Storm project and its modules. As you may be aware,
> there
> was a discussion to move Apache Storm to the attic due to resource
> limitations and waning community involvement. However, we are pleased
> to share that Storm will continue under the Apache Umbrella as a top
> level project.
> 
> To ensure the sustainability and vitality of Apache Storm, we are now
> focusing our efforts on maintaining the Storm 2.x series. However, in
> order to streamline our development process and allocate resources
> efficiently, we must address some challenges posed by less active
> previously community-maintained modules.
> 
> Within the /external directory of the Apache Storm repository, there
> are various modules that were once actively maintained by community
> members, but over time, their activity has diminished. These modules
> have placed a strain on the overall development process, and we
> believe
> it's important to assess their current relevance to the community.
> 
> You can find the list of these modules at the following link: 
> 
> https://github.com/apache/storm/tree/master/external
> 
> ## Call for Your Input
> 
> To assess the actual usage and necessity of these modules, we have
> created a GDPR-compliant survey. Your feedback is crucial in helping
> us
> determine which modules are actively used and which ones may need to
> be
> deprecated. Your input will greatly influence our decisions moving
> forward.
> 
> ## Access the Survey
> 
> We kindly ask you to participate in the survey by indicating whether
> you are currently using any of the modules listed in the /external
> directory. If you believe that a specific module is still essential,
> we
> encourage you to consider contributing to its maintenance.
> 
> Here is the link to the survey:
> 
> https://terminplaner4.dfn.de/EYNJzD9U64UFGOGq
> 
> The survey is open till 30/09/2023 23:59 UTC 
> 
> Of course, you can also just reply to this mail with your preference.
> We will share the results after the survey is closed.
> 
> ## Get Involved
> 
> If you are passionate about any of the modules that are on the verge
> of
> being deprecated, this is your opportunity to step up and contribute.
> Your involvement will not only ensure the continued existence of
> these
> modules but also contribute to the overall health of the Apache Storm
> ecosystem.
> 
> Thanks in advance!
> 
> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Any clue to import Storm's pom.xml in Eclipse for contributing purposes?

[Richard Zowalla]

I think you can fork the project, merge Bipin's changes and test with
Eclipse locally. If the changes solve the issues, it might be a good
thing otherwise we need to ensure, Eclipse users have a chance to be
onboarded :)

Am Dienstag, dem 29.08.2023 um 23:14 -0400 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Hello Julien,
> 
> Here's the precise version of Eclipse IDE which I am using:
> ==
> Eclipse IDE for Java Developers (includes Incubating components)
> 
> Version: 2023-06 (4.28.0)
> Build id: 20230608-1333
> ===
> 
> And here are the versions of my M2E - Maven Integration for Eclipse's
> components:
>  Eclipse.org - m2e    M2E Maven Integration for Eclipse Core
> 2.1.2.20230523-2106    org.eclipse.m2e.logback.feature
>  Eclipse.org - m2e    M2E Maven Integration for Eclipse Core
> 2.3.0.20230523-2033    org.eclipse.m2e.feature
> 
> 
> Unlike Binpin, I can wait forever, the tons of compile issues are
> still there.
> 
> I have seen that Binpin is currently doing a pull request to importe
> stuff in Storm's pom.xml files, maybe should I wait until this is
> merged to master and then re-try ?
> 
> Kind regards,
> Alexandre
> 
> Le mar. 29 août 2023 à 05:39, Julien Nioche
>  a écrit :
> > 
> > Hi Alexandre
> > 
> > I use Eclipse and have imported Storm with Import -> Existing Maven
> > project
> > etc.. but am not getting the error message you mentioned. Which
> > version of
> > Eclipse are you using?
> > I then get tons of compilation errors, like you do.
> > 
> > Julien
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 at 02:23, Alexandre Vermeerbergen <
> > avermeerber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > I am trying to use my Eclipse IDE to work on a contribution on
> > > storm
> > > project.
> > > 
> > > I must be missing something, because I though I was just a matter
> > > of
> > > using Eclipse's import projects... / Maven / Existing Maven
> > > Projects
> > > and point to the root directory of my local Storm git directory.
> > > 
> > > But this import project wizard shows me a 'Setup Maven plugin
> > > connectors' dialog with the following table, having two columns:
> > > "Maven Build" and "Action" and 9 lines.
> > > 
> > > Here are the 2 first lines in JSON:
> > > 
> > > [{"Maven
> > > Build":"build-helper-maven-plugin:1.5:add-
> > > source","Action":"install
> > > buildhelper"},
> > > {"Maven Build":"clojure-maven-plugin:1.8.4:compile","Action":"Use
> > > Workspace Default"}]
> > > 
> > > and from there I cannot click on Finish button, no matter what I
> > > try.
> > > 
> > > If I close this dialog, Eclipse seem to have imported all
> > > sources, but
> > > I get tons of compilation errors, like the ones related to
> > > missing
> > > shaded packages, such as:
> > > 
> > > import org.apache.storm.shade.org
> > > .apache.curator.framework.CuratorFramework;
> > > import
> > > org.apache.storm.shade.org.apache.zookeeper.KeeperException;
> > > import org.apache.storm.shade.org.apache.zookeeper.ZooDefs;
> > > import org.apache.storm.shade.org.apache.zookeeper.data.ACL;
> > > import org.apache.storm.shade.org.apache.zookeeper.data.Id;
> > > import org.apache.storm.shade.org
> > > .apache.zookeeper.server.auth.DigestAuthenticationProvider;
> > > 
> > > Sorry if that sounds trivial to current Storm developers, but I'm
> > > confused what to do to get a "clean" Eclipse workspace to start
> > > contributing ; and I once I will have understood (which you help,
> > > you
> > > Storm developers who already solved that kind of issue) I will
> > > document this in Contributing page.
> > > 
> > > Kind regards,
> > > Alexandre
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > 
> > *Open Source Solutions for Text Engineering*
> > 
> > http://www.digitalpebble.com
> > http://digitalpebble.blogspot.com/
> > #digitalpebble 

[HELP NEEDED] Future of external Storm modules

[Richard Zowalla]

Dear Apache Storm Users,

we would like to update you on recent discussions regarding the future
of the Apache Storm project and its modules. As you may be aware, there
was a discussion to move Apache Storm to the attic due to resource
limitations and waning community involvement. However, we are pleased
to share that Storm will continue under the Apache Umbrella as a top
level project.

To ensure the sustainability and vitality of Apache Storm, we are now
focusing our efforts on maintaining the Storm 2.x series. However, in
order to streamline our development process and allocate resources
efficiently, we must address some challenges posed by less active
previously community-maintained modules.

Within the /external directory of the Apache Storm repository, there
are various modules that were once actively maintained by community
members, but over time, their activity has diminished. These modules
have placed a strain on the overall development process, and we believe
it's important to assess their current relevance to the community.

You can find the list of these modules at the following link: 

https://github.com/apache/storm/tree/master/external

## Call for Your Input

To assess the actual usage and necessity of these modules, we have
created a GDPR-compliant survey. Your feedback is crucial in helping us
determine which modules are actively used and which ones may need to be
deprecated. Your input will greatly influence our decisions moving
forward.

## Access the Survey

We kindly ask you to participate in the survey by indicating whether
you are currently using any of the modules listed in the /external
directory. If you believe that a specific module is still essential, we
encourage you to consider contributing to its maintenance.

Here is the link to the survey:

https://terminplaner4.dfn.de/EYNJzD9U64UFGOGq

The survey is open till 30/09/2023 23:59 UTC 

Of course, you can also just reply to this mail with your preference.
We will share the results after the survey is closed.

## Get Involved

If you are passionate about any of the modules that are on the verge of
being deprecated, this is your opportunity to step up and contribute.
Your involvement will not only ensure the continued existence of these
modules but also contribute to the overall health of the Apache Storm
ecosystem.

Thanks in advance!

[DISCUSS] Future of /external modules -> Ask for community input

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

we (Julien, Alexandre and myself) have been discussing about the future
of the /external modules in Storm over in Slack (#Storm). As Slack
isn't the place for any decisions at the ASF, we are now moving these
discussion to the list.

Many of these modules aren't maintained anymore and there created in
the spirit of "committer sponsorships": Many of those "sponsors" aren't
active anymore.

To get an idea of which of these modules are actually used, we were
thinking of asking the community for input before discussing
deprecating or removing modules from "/external" from Storm 2.

I created a draft mail for user@ and dev@ which can be found below.

WDYT? Any thoughts?

Gruß
Richard




Dear Apache Storm Users,

we would like to update you on recent discussions regarding the future
of the Apache Storm project and its modules. As you may be aware, there
was a discussion to move Apache Storm to the attic due to resource
limitations and waning community involvement. However, we are pleased
to share that Storm will continue under the Apache Umbrella as a top
level project.

To ensure the sustainability and vitality of Apache Storm, we are now
focusing our efforts on maintaining the Storm 2.x series. However, in
order to streamline our development process and allocate resources
efficiently, we must address some challenges posed by less active
previously community-maintained modules.

Within the /external directory of the Apache Storm repository, there
are various modules that were once actively maintained by community
members, but over time, their activity has diminished. These modules
have placed a strain on the overall development process, and we believe
it's important to assess their current relevance to the community.

You can find the list of these modules at the following link: 

https://github.com/apache/storm/tree/master/external

## Call for Your Input

To assess the actual usage and necessity of these modules, we have
created a GDPR-compliant survey. Your feedback is crucial in helping us
determine which modules are actively used and which ones may need to be
deprecated. Your input will greatly influence our decisions moving
forward.

## Access the Survey

We kindly ask you to participate in the survey by indicating whether
you are currently using any of the modules listed in the /external
directory. If you believe that a specific module is still essential, we
encourage you to consider contributing to its maintenance.

Here is the link to the survey:

 ;-)

## Get Involved

If you are passionate about any of the modules that are on the verge of
being deprecated, this is your opportunity to step up and contribute.
Your involvement will not only ensure the continued existence of these
modules but also contribute to the overall health of the Apache Storm
ecosystem.

Thanks in advance!

Re: Any clue to import Storm's pom.xml in Eclipse for contributing purposes?

[Richard Zowalla]

I am using IntelliJ, so no idea about Eclipse. Sorry.


Am Sonntag, dem 27.08.2023 um 21:21 -0400 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Hello,
> 
> I am trying to use my Eclipse IDE to work on a contribution on storm
> project.
> 
> I must be missing something, because I though I was just a matter of
> using Eclipse's import projects... / Maven / Existing Maven Projects
> and point to the root directory of my local Storm git directory.
> 
> But this import project wizard shows me a 'Setup Maven plugin
> connectors' dialog with the following table, having two columns:
> "Maven Build" and "Action" and 9 lines.
> 
> Here are the 2 first lines in JSON:
> 
> [{"Maven Build":"build-helper-maven-plugin:1.5:add-
> source","Action":"install
> buildhelper"},
> {"Maven Build":"clojure-maven-plugin:1.8.4:compile","Action":"Use
> Workspace Default"}]
> 
> and from there I cannot click on Finish button, no matter what I try.
> 
> If I close this dialog, Eclipse seem to have imported all sources,
> but
> I get tons of compilation errors, like the ones related to missing
> shaded packages, such as:
> 
> import
> org.apache.storm.shade.org.apache.curator.framework.CuratorFramework;
> import org.apache.storm.shade.org.apache.zookeeper.KeeperException;
> import org.apache.storm.shade.org.apache.zookeeper.ZooDefs;
> import org.apache.storm.shade.org.apache.zookeeper.data.ACL;
> import org.apache.storm.shade.org.apache.zookeeper.data.Id;
> import
> org.apache.storm.shade.org.apache.zookeeper.server.auth.DigestAuthent
> icationProvider;
> 
> Sorry if that sounds trivial to current Storm developers, but I'm
> confused what to do to get a "clean" Eclipse workspace to start
> contributing ; and I once I will have understood (which you help, you
> Storm developers who already solved that kind of issue) I will
> document this in Contributing page.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Alexandre

Re: Is it normal not to receive notifications on dev list when new Storm JIRA are created?

[Richard Zowalla]

It is a separate list usually to avoid too many mails on the actual dev list.

It is https://lists.apache.org/list.html?iss...@storm.apache.org issues@ for 
Storm. Other ASF projects use commits@ etc.

Gruß
Richard 

Am 21. August 2023 19:11:18 MESZ schrieb Alexandre Vermeerbergen 
:
>Hello,
>
>I recently created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3958,
>and I realize that this creation is not automatically associated with
>a mail to dev@storm.apache.org.
>
>Maybe this is normal, but I'm wondering: aren't we risking to miss
>interesting feature requests and/or bug reports if people open Storm
>JIRA and think somebody in Storm DEV will notice it?
>
>Sorry if that's a naive question...
>
>Thanks;
>Alexandre

Re: [Discuss] updating Community/People page on storm-site

[Richard Zowalla]

You can do it yourself.

Am 20. August 2023 12:04:20 MESZ schrieb Alexandre Vermeerbergen 
:
>Okay thanks, so I guess I need to wait until next Tuesday to get this
>pull request to be merged, right ?
>Next naive question: who should click on "Merge Pull Request" here
>https://github.com/apache/storm-site/pull/45#pullrequestreview-1585813522
>?
>
>Thank,
>Alexandre
>
>Le dim. 20 août 2023 à 09:10, Richard Zowalla  a écrit :
>>
>> Wait for reviews + 2-3 days before merging (timezones, holidays, etc), so 
>> people have a chance to look.
>>
>> In case of "storm-site":
>>
>> It uses "asf-site" branch and will automatically picked up by the ASF site 
>> builder and gets published once a new commit is put to that branch ;-)
>>
>> Am 19. August 2023 22:04:07 MESZ schrieb Alexandre Vermeerbergen 
>> :
>> >I just sent pull request https://github.com/apache/storm-site/pull/45
>> >for this change to storm-site.
>> >
>> >Since it's my first pull request, I am curious: what is the next step
>> >to get this change merged, and then Apache Storm site to be actually
>> >updated?
>> >
>> >Note: I have tested my change on my machine using:
>> >bundle exec jekyll serve -w
>> >(as documented in storm-site/README.md)
>> >
>> >Also, I have includes in my pull request a simple change to
>> >.gitignore, so as to avoid Gemfile.lock file to be part of the
>> >repository (it's a transient file generated by the bundle XXX command)
>> >
>> >Kind regards,
>> >Alexandre
>> >
>> >Le ven. 18 août 2023 à 22:00, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
>> > a écrit :
>> >>
>> >> OK, created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3957 for the
>> >> tracking (self assigned)
>> >>
>> >> Le ven. 18 août 2023 à 21:48, Richard Zowalla  a écrit :
>> >> >
>> >> > I am fine with it.
>> >> >
>> >> > It might be a nice to have to track website changes in Jira, imho.
>> >> > We won'T include such changes in a release's changelog but might be a
>> >> > good thing to know, that someone is working on that task.
>> >> >
>> >> > Gruß
>> >> > Richard
>> >> >
>> >> > Am Freitag, dem 18.08.2023 um 19:59 +0200 schrieb Alexandre
>> >> > Vermeerbergen:
>> >> > > Hello,
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Community/People page on storm-site
>> >> > > (https://storm.apache.org/contribute/People.html) is currently
>> >> > > outdated.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > For example, it is missing Julien Nioche who recently joined as a
>> >> > > PMC.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I volunteer to fix this page, by replacing the static table fed by
>> >> > > _data/committers.yml file, by a link to ASF's
>> >> > > https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?storm
>> >> > >
>> >> > > My idea is to replace existing People.md file's content by this
>> >> > > content:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > ---
>> >> > > title: People
>> >> > > layout: documentation
>> >> > > documentation: true
>> >> > > ---
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Current list of committers and PMC's are
>> >> > > [here](https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?storm)
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > and to remove _data/committers.yml file.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Any objection?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Do I need to create a JIRA and then a branch prefixed by JIRA number,
>> >> > > like it's required for code changes ?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Note: I am aware that there is the same issue with Project Leader &
>> >> > > Committers list at https://github.com/apache/storm#readme, but here I
>> >> > > am starting with storm-site.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Kind regards,
>> >> > > Alexandre
>> >> >

Re: [Discuss] updating Community/People page on storm-site

[Richard Zowalla]

Wait for reviews + 2-3 days before merging (timezones, holidays, etc), so 
people have a chance to look. 

In case of "storm-site":

It uses "asf-site" branch and will automatically picked up by the ASF site 
builder and gets published once a new commit is put to that branch ;-)

Am 19. August 2023 22:04:07 MESZ schrieb Alexandre Vermeerbergen 
:
>I just sent pull request https://github.com/apache/storm-site/pull/45
>for this change to storm-site.
>
>Since it's my first pull request, I am curious: what is the next step
>to get this change merged, and then Apache Storm site to be actually
>updated?
>
>Note: I have tested my change on my machine using:
>bundle exec jekyll serve -w
>(as documented in storm-site/README.md)
>
>Also, I have includes in my pull request a simple change to
>.gitignore, so as to avoid Gemfile.lock file to be part of the
>repository (it's a transient file generated by the bundle XXX command)
>
>Kind regards,
>Alexandre
>
>Le ven. 18 août 2023 à 22:00, Alexandre Vermeerbergen
> a écrit :
>>
>> OK, created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3957 for the
>> tracking (self assigned)
>>
>> Le ven. 18 août 2023 à 21:48, Richard Zowalla  a écrit :
>> >
>> > I am fine with it.
>> >
>> > It might be a nice to have to track website changes in Jira, imho.
>> > We won'T include such changes in a release's changelog but might be a
>> > good thing to know, that someone is working on that task.
>> >
>> > Gruß
>> > Richard
>> >
>> > Am Freitag, dem 18.08.2023 um 19:59 +0200 schrieb Alexandre
>> > Vermeerbergen:
>> > > Hello,
>> > >
>> > > Community/People page on storm-site
>> > > (https://storm.apache.org/contribute/People.html) is currently
>> > > outdated.
>> > >
>> > > For example, it is missing Julien Nioche who recently joined as a
>> > > PMC.
>> > >
>> > > I volunteer to fix this page, by replacing the static table fed by
>> > > _data/committers.yml file, by a link to ASF's
>> > > https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?storm
>> > >
>> > > My idea is to replace existing People.md file's content by this
>> > > content:
>> > >
>> > > ---
>> > > title: People
>> > > layout: documentation
>> > > documentation: true
>> > > ---
>> > >
>> > > Current list of committers and PMC's are
>> > > [here](https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?storm)
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > and to remove _data/committers.yml file.
>> > >
>> > > Any objection?
>> > >
>> > > Do I need to create a JIRA and then a branch prefixed by JIRA number,
>> > > like it's required for code changes ?
>> > >
>> > > Note: I am aware that there is the same issue with Project Leader &
>> > > Committers list at https://github.com/apache/storm#readme, but here I
>> > > am starting with storm-site.
>> > >
>> > > Kind regards,
>> > > Alexandre
>> >

Re: [Discuss] updating Community/People page on storm-site

[Richard Zowalla]

I am fine with it.

It might be a nice to have to track website changes in Jira, imho.
We won'T include such changes in a release's changelog but might be a
good thing to know, that someone is working on that task.

Gruß
Richard

Am Freitag, dem 18.08.2023 um 19:59 +0200 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Hello,
> 
> Community/People page on storm-site
> (https://storm.apache.org/contribute/People.html) is currently
> outdated.
> 
> For example, it is missing Julien Nioche who recently joined as a
> PMC.
> 
> I volunteer to fix this page, by replacing the static table fed by
> _data/committers.yml file, by a link to ASF's
> https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?storm
> 
> My idea is to replace existing People.md file's content by this
> content:
> 
> ---
> title: People
> layout: documentation
> documentation: true
> ---
> 
> Current list of committers and PMC's are
> [here](https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?storm)
> 
> 
> and to remove _data/committers.yml file.
> 
> Any objection?
> 
> Do I need to create a JIRA and then a branch prefixed by JIRA number,
> like it's required for code changes ?
> 
> Note: I am aware that there is the same issue with Project Leader &
> Committers list at https://github.com/apache/storm#readme, but here I
> am starting with storm-site.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Alexandre

Re: [DISCUSS] Migrate to GitHub Issues (and stop using Jira)

[Richard Zowalla]

Just a short response: We have a significant number of asf projects
which migrated to GH issues recently, ie. there is automatic tooling in
place to conduct such migration (for example: Shiro did it recently). 

It often involves to make Jira read-only and link from the relevant GH
issues to the Jira issue.

Gruß
Richard

Am Mittwoch, dem 16.08.2023 um 10:03 +0200 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Hello Richard,
> 
> On the one hand, I have nothing against the use of GitHub issues
> instead of JIRA issues. I agree that JIRA is kind of overkill for the
> simple need of tracking issues for Storm project.
> 
> On the other hand, the migration of existing JIRA issues to GitHub
> issues is likely to take time.
> Given that recently Storm project was threatened to go attic because
> of its decreasing activity, I'm wondering if such migration is a fair
> use of Storm's contributors.
> 
> Maybe an estimation of work to be done would help:
> - How many opened JIRA issues are there?
> - Is there a way to (at least partially) automate JIRA to GitHub
> issues migration?
>    I guess that manually opening a GitHub issue and copying both the
> title, initial content description, copy URL to initial JIRA, add
> attached materiel (if any) and copying related discussions will be an
> hassle...
> 
> Thanks,
> Alexandre
> 
> Le mer. 16 août 2023 à 09:24, Richard Zowalla  a
> écrit :
> > 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > I'd like to take a moment to discuss something that I believe will
> > significantly enhance our project's collaboration and attract new
> > contributors: migrating from Jira to GitHub Issues and GitHub
> > Discussions.
> > 
> > We aren't using Jira very well in most cases, and the requirement
> > for a
> > Jira ticket for a code change leads to people just creating new
> > Jira
> > tickets, rather than searching to see if there already exists a
> > ticket
> > for that feature. Additionally most of the committers follow a
> > similar
> > path of "work on feature, open Jira ticket just before creating
> > PR".
> > 
> > One downside is we might get people opening issues for "help, how
> > do I
> > do this" -- I think we can address that by having an issue template
> > saying something like "DO NOT OPEN AN ISSUE ASKING FOR HELP - ask
> > on
> > users@ or in GitHub Discussions. Another downside would be the
> > vendor
> > lock related to GitHub.
> > 
> > In addition, the ASF JIRA instance no longer allows users to self-
> > sign-
> > up (though it DOES allow us to invite others). This is largely due
> > to
> > spam.
> > 
> > Most developers have a GitHub account (and that is where most folks
> > interact with Storm's code base), and this would meet folks where
> > they
> > are, as opposed to making them go somewhere else to dig through
> > issues
> > or to start working on them. Enabling GitHub discussions would also
> > enable users to work where they are and we can still sent
> > everything to
> > the related mailing lists to ensure archivability.
> > 
> > 
> > Tentative suggestion:
> > * Go through existing Storm JIRA issues and close any issues that
> > are
> > no
> > longer relevant.
> > * Migrate open issues to GitHub Issues in apache/storm (linking
> > back to
> > the
> > JIRA issue)
> > * All new issues will only be created in GitHub Issues
> > * When an existing JIRA issue is fixed, it will be updated in both
> > locations
> > 
> > Potential process changes:
> > * Release notes/change logs are currently generated through JIRA,
> > which
> > we would need to change in order to make it happen.
> > 
> > Thoughts?
> > 
> > Gruß
> > Richard



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[DISCUSS] Migrate to GitHub Issues (and stop using Jira)

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,

I'd like to take a moment to discuss something that I believe will
significantly enhance our project's collaboration and attract new
contributors: migrating from Jira to GitHub Issues and GitHub
Discussions.

We aren't using Jira very well in most cases, and the requirement for a
Jira ticket for a code change leads to people just creating new Jira
tickets, rather than searching to see if there already exists a ticket
for that feature. Additionally most of the committers follow a similar
path of "work on feature, open Jira ticket just before creating PR".

One downside is we might get people opening issues for "help, how do I
do this" -- I think we can address that by having an issue template
saying something like "DO NOT OPEN AN ISSUE ASKING FOR HELP - ask on
users@ or in GitHub Discussions. Another downside would be the vendor
lock related to GitHub.

In addition, the ASF JIRA instance no longer allows users to self-sign-
up (though it DOES allow us to invite others). This is largely due to
spam.

Most developers have a GitHub account (and that is where most folks
interact with Storm's code base), and this would meet folks where they
are, as opposed to making them go somewhere else to dig through issues
or to start working on them. Enabling GitHub discussions would also
enable users to work where they are and we can still sent everything to
the related mailing lists to ensure archivability. 


Tentative suggestion:
* Go through existing Storm JIRA issues and close any issues that are
no
longer relevant.
* Migrate open issues to GitHub Issues in apache/storm (linking back to
the
JIRA issue)
* All new issues will only be created in GitHub Issues
* When an existing JIRA issue is fixed, it will be updated in both
locations

Potential process changes:
* Release notes/change logs are currently generated through JIRA, which
we would need to change in order to make it happen.

Thoughts?

Gruß
Richard

Re: Fwd: STORM_ZOOKEEPER_SUPERACL_SCHEMA error while using the application

[Richard Zowalla]

Gentle reminder: Please avoid cross posting. user@ is the perfect place for 
your question.

Gruß
Richard 

Am 8. August 2023 20:10:57 MESZ schrieb Prakash Choudhary 
:
>Hello team,
>
>I am trying to run a Storm application and getting the below error I am new
>to Storm like to check if anyone got this error before
>
>STORM_ZOOKEEPER_SUPERACL_SCHEMA
>
>/var/log/iotdemo.log' returned 1. WARNING: some? already refers to:
>#'clojure.core/some? in namespace: org.apache.storm.util, being
>replaced by: #'org.apache.storm.util/some?
>WARNING: update already refers to: #'clojure.core/update in namespace:
>org.apache.storm.util, being replaced by:
>#'org.apache.storm.util/update
>WARNING: some? already refers to: #'clojure.core/some? in namespace:
>org.apache.storm.config, being replaced by:
>#'org.apache.storm.util/some?
>WARNING: update already refers to: #'clojure.core/update in namespace:
>org.apache.storm.config, being replaced by:
>#'org.apache.storm.util/update
>Exception in thread "main" java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError
>Caused by: java.lang.NoSuchFieldException:
>STORM_ZOOKEEPER_SUPERACL_SCHEMA, compiling:(config.clj:69:11)
>   at clojure.lang.Compiler$InvokeExpr.eval(Compiler.java:3628)
>   at clojure.lang.Compiler$DefExpr.eval(Compiler.java:439)
>   at clojure.lang.Compiler.eval(Compiler.java:6787)
>   at clojure.lang.Compiler.load(Compiler.java:7227)
>   at clojure.lang.RT.loadResourceScript(RT.java:371)
>   at clojure.lang.RT.loadResourceScript(RT.java:362)
>   at clojure.lang.RT.load(RT.java:446)
>   at clojure.lang.RT.load(RT.java:412)
>   at clojure.core$load$fn__5448.invoke(core.clj:5866)
>   at clojure.core$load.doInvoke(core.clj:5865)
>   at clojure.lang.RestFn.invoke(RestFn.java:408)
>   at clojure.core$load_one.invoke(core.clj:5671)
>   at clojure.core$load_lib$fn__5397.invoke(core.clj:5711)
>   at clojure.core$load_lib.doInvoke(core.clj:5710)
>   at clojure.lang.RestFn.applyTo(RestFn.java:142)
>   at clojure.core$apply.invoke(core.clj:632)
>   at clojure.core$load_libs.doInvoke(core.clj:5753)
>   at clojure.lang.RestFn.applyTo(RestFn.java:137)
>   at clojure.core$apply.invoke(core.clj:634)
>   at clojure.core$use.doInvoke(core.clj:5843)
>   at clojure.lang.RestFn.invoke(RestFn.java:408)
>   at 
> org.apache.storm.command.config_value$eval3$loading__5340__auto4.invoke(config_value.clj:16)
>   at 
> org.apache.storm.command.config_value$eval3.invoke(config_value.clj:16)
>   at clojure.lang.Compiler.eval(Compiler.java:6782)
>   at clojure.lang.Compiler.eval(Compiler.java:6771)
>   at clojure.lang.Compiler.load(Compiler.java:7227)
>   at clojure.lang.RT.loadResourceScript(RT.java:371)
>   at clojure.lang.RT.loadResourceScript(RT.java:362)
>   at clojure.lang.RT.load(RT.java:446)
>   at clojure.lang.RT.load(RT.java:412)
>   at clojure.core$load$fn__5448.invoke(core.clj:5866)
>   at clojure.core$load.doInvoke(core.clj:5865)
>   at clojure.lang.RestFn.invoke(RestFn.java:408)
>   at clojure.lang.Var.invoke(Var.java:379)
>   at org.apache.storm.command.config_value.(Unknown Source)
>Caused by: java.lang.NoSuchFieldException: STORM_ZOOKEEPER_SUPERACL_SCHEMA
>   at java.lang.Class.getField(Class.java:1703)
>   at org.apache.storm.config$fn__1001.invoke(config.clj:67)
>   at clojure.core$map$fn__4553.invoke(core.clj:2624)
>   at clojure.lang.LazySeq.sval(LazySeq.java:40)
>   at clojure.lang.LazySeq.seq(LazySeq.java:49)
>   at clojure.lang.RT.seq(RT.java:507)
>   at clojure.core$seq__4128.invoke(core.clj:137)
>   at clojure.core.protocols$seq_reduce.invoke(protocols.clj:30)
>   at clojure.core.protocols$fn__6506.invoke(protocols.clj:101)
>   at 
> clojure.core.protocols$fn__6452$G__6447__6465.invoke(protocols.clj:13)
>   at clojure.core$reduce.invoke(core.clj:6519)
>   at clojure.core$into.invoke(core.clj:6600)
>   at clojure.lang.AFn.applyToHelper(AFn.java:156)
>   at clojure.lang.AFn.applyTo(AFn.java:144)
>   at clojure.lang.Compiler$InvokeExpr.eval(Compiler.java:3623)
>   ... 34 more
>SLF4J: Detected both log4j-over-slf4j.jar AND slf4j-log4j12.jar on the
>class path, preempting StackOverflowError.
>SLF4J: See also http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#log4jDelegationLoop
>for more details.
>Exception in thread "main" java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError
>   at org.apache.log4j.Logger.getLogger(Logger.java:39)
>   at org.apache.log4j.Logger.getLogger(Logger.java:43)
>   at 
> com.hortonworks.streaming.impl.topologies.BaseTruckEventTopology.(BaseTruckEventTopology.java:11)
>Caused by: java.lang.IllegalStateException: Detected both
>log4j-over-slf4j.jar AND slf4j-log4j12.jar on the class path,
>preempting StackOverflowError. See also
>http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#log4jDelegationLoop for more details.
>   at 
> org.apache.log4j.Log4jLoggerFactory.(Log4jLoggerFactory.java:49)
>
>-- 

Re: Addendum to Storm's release process

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi Alexandre,

from a formal point of view: I guess, that you are still in a "pending"
state, so everything is ok (no need to re-cast, etc.). 

I just asked our PMC chair to formally provide you with the information
you need for your ASF id, CLA etc.

Gruß
Richard



Am Montag, dem 07.08.2023 um 08:44 +0200 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> Hello,
> 
> Ah sorry: I indeed accepted Richard's invitation to join as a PMC,
> but I
> thought I had to wait for some formal confirmation before I could
> cast a
> binding vote - hence my mention as "non-binding " with my vote.
> 
> Should I recast it, or I am right to wait for some formal annouce of
> my PMC
> status?
> 
> Alexandre
> 
> 
> 
> Le sam. 5 août 2023, 19:16, Richard Zowalla  a
> écrit :
> 
> > Hey Bipin,
> > 
> > think it is sufficient, if you put your own +1 to the original
> > thread.
> > Given that Alexandre has also accepted his invitation, we should be
> > good
> > now.
> > 
> > Thanks for doing the release!
> > 
> > Gruß
> > Richard
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Am 5. August 2023 19:09:40 MESZ schrieb Bipin Prasad <
> > bipinpra...@apache.org>:
> > > Richard,
> > >    Thanks for this note on the vote process. I will ask for
> > > further
> > votes on the to ensure compliance - even though RC4 was moved to
> > release
> > area. Will send out an email with the new locations. Once an
> > additional
> > vote is registered, I will send out the vote result email.
> > > 
> > > --Bipin
> > > 
> > > On 2023/08/04 20:05:35 Richard Zowalla wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > During the last release vote, I noticed the following things
> > > > that we
> > > > should do better next time to adhere to the ASF release
> > > > guidelines
> > > > [1,2,3]:
> > > > 
> > > > - We need at least 3 (binding) votes for a release. A binding
> > > > vote
> > > > originates from PMC members only (although community is
> > > > encouraged to
> > > > also cast non-binding votes and test the binaries). For 2.5.0,
> > > > we only
> > > > had 2 (binding) votes for RC4 and an implicit one (at least I
> > > > assume
> > > > it) by our release manager, which would need to be cast next
> > > > time, so
> > > > we can formally do the release according to the foundation's
> > > > policies.
> > > > 
> > > > - A successful vote should be followed by a [VOTE] [RESULT]
> > > > mail to
> > > > indicate, that the vote was successful and the release process
> > > > continues.
> > > > 
> > > > - If multiple RC's are needed to do a release, we would need to
> > > > sent a
> > > > mail with [VOTE] [CANCELLED] to indicate the failed attempt and
> > > > start a
> > > > new mail thread with the next release candidate. This make the
> > > > process
> > > > more transparent to everyone.
> > > > 
> > > > No blaming, just my observation. I think, that we can do better
> > > > next
> > > > time :)
> > > > 
> > > > Gruß
> > > > Richard
> > > > 
> > > > [1] https://infra.apache.org/release-publishing.html
> > > > [2] https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> > > > [3] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> > > > 
> > 

Re: Storm 2.5.0 Release Candidate Vote

[Richard Zowalla]

+1 (Binding - as before)

Am 5. August 2023 19:24:00 MESZ schrieb Bipin Prasad :
>Note: In order to be compliant with ASF procedures, we need an additional
>vote for Storm 2.5.0 RC4 (which was released yesterday) . Please test the
>following and vote:
>
>Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc4 was earlier released yesterday to
>here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0
>Please vote on this release.
>
>   1. How to vote is described here:
>   
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
>   2. Release notes are here:
>   
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>   .
>   3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
>   4. The source archive being votes upon is here:
>   
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
>   5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>   https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e in
>   this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
>
>
>When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
>This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
>[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.5.0
>[ ]   0 No opinion
>[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
>Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
>
>--Bipin Prasad
>
>On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 2:41 PM Bipin Prasad  wrote:
>
>> Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc4 is here:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc4
>> Please vote on this release.
>>
>>1. How to vote is described here:
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
>>2. Release notes are here:
>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc4/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>>.
>>3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
>>4. The source archive being votes upon is here:
>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc4/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
>>5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>>https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e
>> in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
>>
>>
>> When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.5.0
>> [ ]   0 No opinion
>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>
>> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
>>
>> --Bipin Prasad
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 4:07 PM Bipin Prasad 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc3 is here:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc3
>>> Please vote on this release.
>>>
>>>1. How to vote is described here:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
>>>2. Release notes are here:
>>>
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc3/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>>>.
>>>3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
>>>4. The source archive being votes upon is here:
>>>
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc3/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
>>>5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>>>https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e
>>> in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
>>>
>>>
>>> When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.5.0
>>> [ ]   0 No opinion
>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>
>>> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
>>>
>>> --Bipin Prasad
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 8:28 AM Bipin Prasad 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc2 is here:
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2
 Please vote on this release.

1. How to vote is described here:

 https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
2. Release notes are here:

 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2/RELEASE_NOTES.html
.
3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
4. The source archive being votes upon is here:

 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e
 in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS


 When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the 

Re: Addendum to Storm's release process

[Richard Zowalla]

Hey Bipin,  

think it is sufficient, if you put your own +1 to the original thread. Given 
that Alexandre has also accepted his invitation, we should be good now.

Thanks for doing the release!

Gruß
Richard 




Am 5. August 2023 19:09:40 MESZ schrieb Bipin Prasad :
>Richard, 
>Thanks for this note on the vote process. I will ask for further votes on 
> the to ensure compliance - even though RC4 was moved to release area. Will 
> send out an email with the new locations. Once an additional vote is 
> registered, I will send out the vote result email.
>
>--Bipin
>
>On 2023/08/04 20:05:35 Richard Zowalla wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> 
>> During the last release vote, I noticed the following things that we
>> should do better next time to adhere to the ASF release guidelines
>> [1,2,3]:
>> 
>> - We need at least 3 (binding) votes for a release. A binding vote
>> originates from PMC members only (although community is encouraged to
>> also cast non-binding votes and test the binaries). For 2.5.0, we only
>> had 2 (binding) votes for RC4 and an implicit one (at least I assume
>> it) by our release manager, which would need to be cast next time, so
>> we can formally do the release according to the foundation's policies.
>> 
>> - A successful vote should be followed by a [VOTE] [RESULT] mail to
>> indicate, that the vote was successful and the release process
>> continues.
>> 
>> - If multiple RC's are needed to do a release, we would need to sent a
>> mail with [VOTE] [CANCELLED] to indicate the failed attempt and start a
>> new mail thread with the next release candidate. This make the process
>> more transparent to everyone. 
>> 
>> No blaming, just my observation. I think, that we can do better next
>> time :)
>> 
>> Gruß
>> Richard
>> 
>> [1] https://infra.apache.org/release-publishing.html
>> [2] https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
>> [3] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>> 

Re: Storm 2.5.0 Release Candidate Vote

[Richard Zowalla]

The vote is indeed over. The artifacts arrived at central yesterday. Thanks for 
testing :-)

Am 5. August 2023 09:13:34 MESZ schrieb Alexandre Vermeerbergen 
:
>Hello,
>
>So far, +1 [non binding] for 2.5.0 RC4 based on my tests, which are to
>use binaries to upgrade my pre production distributed cluster running
>10+ topologies at scale (> 1 million tuples per minute) running on
>Rocky Linux x64 on AWS EC2 VMs  with IBM Semeru JDK 17.0.7.
>
>Since I have been running with pre production setup with 2.5.0 since
>RC1, then updated to RC2 (I skipped RC3 as it was so short lived) and
>got no performance regressions nor feature regressions, I'm confident
>that this 2.5.0 RC4 is stable enough vs. 2.4.0
>
>I checked the SHA512 signatures => OK.
>
>Disclaimer: I haven't yet done source compilation, will do next week
>but maybe vote will be passed.
>
>Kind regards,
>Alexandre
>
>Le ven. 4 août 2023 à 16:45, Bipin Prasad  a écrit :
>>
>> Note added in RELEASE_NOTES.html, updated sha512 for RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>> Will go thru the rest of the release process.
>>
>> On 2023/08/04 14:19:15 Bipin Prasad wrote:
>> > Thank you for checking on this RC4 and the vote. I will add note about 
>> > python3 in the README.
>> >
>> > On 2023/08/04 08:58:12 Richard Zowalla wrote:
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > 1. Checked SHA512 sums: OK
>> > > 2. Checked ASC signatures: OK
>> > > 3. Build from sources with the following setup
>> > >
>> > > Apache Maven 3.8.7 (b89d5959fcde851dcb1c8946a785a163f14e1e29)
>> > > Maven home: /usr/share/maven
>> > > Java version: 11.0.20, vendor: Ubuntu, runtime: /usr/lib/jvm/java-11-
>> > > openjdk-amd64
>> > > Default locale: de_DE, platform encoding: UTF-8
>> > > OS name: "linux", version: "5.19.0-50-generic", arch: "amd64", family:
>> > > "unix"
>> > >
>> > > similar to GH actions: SUCCESS
>> > >
>> > > 4. Run all tests (similar to GH actions) locally: SUCCESS
>> > >
>> > > 5. Run a dockerized Storm topology for a while
>> > >
>> > > (A) First I saw "/usr/bin/env: ‘python3’: No such file or directory" or
>> > > "/apache-storm-2.5.0/bin/storm: line 42: 10 * ‘python3’: + ‘python3’::
>> > > syntax error: operand expected (error token is "‘python3’: +
>> > > ‘python3’:")" in the logs indicating that my docker containers did not
>> > > have python3 available. I fixed it locally but might be worth to
>> > > mention that in the announcement so people don't confused but isn't a
>> > > blocker for 2.5.0-rc4 IMHO.
>> > >
>> > > (B) Storm UI is showing my cluster, topology viz looks good, no script
>> > > errors in browser console
>> > >
>> > > (C) Started the topology using flux, don't see any issues (didn't test
>> > > log viewer).
>> > >
>> > > Thanks for preparing RC4, Bipin!!
>> > >
>> > > So here is my +1 (binding) for RC4.
>> > >
>> > > Gruß
>> > > Richard
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Am Donnerstag, dem 03.08.2023 um 14:41 -0700 schrieb Bipin Prasad:
>> > > > Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc4 is here:
>> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc4
>> > > > Please vote on this release.
>> > > >
>> > > >1. How to vote is described here:
>> > > >
>> > > > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
>> > > >2. Release notes are here:
>> > > >
>> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc4/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>> > > >.
>> > > >3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
>> > > >4. The source archive being votes upon is here:
>> > > >
>> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc4/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
>> > > >5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>> > > >
>> > > > https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e
>> > > >  in
>> > > >this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > When voting, please list the 

Addendum to Storm's release process

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi all,


During the last release vote, I noticed the following things that we
should do better next time to adhere to the ASF release guidelines
[1,2,3]:

- We need at least 3 (binding) votes for a release. A binding vote
originates from PMC members only (although community is encouraged to
also cast non-binding votes and test the binaries). For 2.5.0, we only
had 2 (binding) votes for RC4 and an implicit one (at least I assume
it) by our release manager, which would need to be cast next time, so
we can formally do the release according to the foundation's policies.

- A successful vote should be followed by a [VOTE] [RESULT] mail to
indicate, that the vote was successful and the release process
continues.

- If multiple RC's are needed to do a release, we would need to sent a
mail with [VOTE] [CANCELLED] to indicate the failed attempt and start a
new mail thread with the next release candidate. This make the process
more transparent to everyone. 

No blaming, just my observation. I think, that we can do better next
time :)

Gruß
Richard

[1] https://infra.apache.org/release-publishing.html
[2] https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
[3] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html

Re: Storm 2.5.0 Release Candidate Vote

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi,

1. Checked SHA512 sums: OK
2. Checked ASC signatures: OK
3. Build from sources with the following setup

Apache Maven 3.8.7 (b89d5959fcde851dcb1c8946a785a163f14e1e29)
Maven home: /usr/share/maven
Java version: 11.0.20, vendor: Ubuntu, runtime: /usr/lib/jvm/java-11-
openjdk-amd64
Default locale: de_DE, platform encoding: UTF-8
OS name: "linux", version: "5.19.0-50-generic", arch: "amd64", family:
"unix"

similar to GH actions: SUCCESS

4. Run all tests (similar to GH actions) locally: SUCCESS

5. Run a dockerized Storm topology for a while

(A) First I saw "/usr/bin/env: ‘python3’: No such file or directory" or
"/apache-storm-2.5.0/bin/storm: line 42: 10 * ‘python3’: + ‘python3’::
syntax error: operand expected (error token is "‘python3’: +
‘python3’:")" in the logs indicating that my docker containers did not
have python3 available. I fixed it locally but might be worth to
mention that in the announcement so people don't confused but isn't a
blocker for 2.5.0-rc4 IMHO.

(B) Storm UI is showing my cluster, topology viz looks good, no script
errors in browser console

(C) Started the topology using flux, don't see any issues (didn't test
log viewer).

Thanks for preparing RC4, Bipin!!

So here is my +1 (binding) for RC4.

Gruß
Richard



Am Donnerstag, dem 03.08.2023 um 14:41 -0700 schrieb Bipin Prasad:
> Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc4 is here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc4
> Please vote on this release.
> 
>    1. How to vote is described here:
>   
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
>    2. Release notes are here:
>   
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc4/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>    .
>    3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
>    4. The source archive being votes upon is here:
>   
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc4/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
>    5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>   
> https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e
>  in
>    this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
> 
> 
> When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> 
>     [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.5.0
>     [ ]   0 No opinion
>     [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> 
> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> 
> --Bipin Prasad
> 
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 4:07 PM Bipin Prasad 
> wrote:
> 
> > Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc3 is here:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc3
> > Please vote on this release.
> > 
> >    1. How to vote is described here:
> >   
> > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
> >    2. Release notes are here:
> >   
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc3/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> >    .
> >    3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
> >    4. The source archive being votes upon is here:
> >   
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc3/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
> >    5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
> >   
> > https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e
> >     in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
> > 
> > 
> > When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
> > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> > 
> >     [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.5.0
> >     [ ]   0 No opinion
> >     [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> > 
> > Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> > 
> > --Bipin Prasad
> > 
> > On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 8:28 AM Bipin Prasad
> > 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc2 is here:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2
> > > Please vote on this release.
> > > 
> > >    1. How to vote is described here:
> > >   
> > > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
> > >    2. Release notes are here:
> > >   
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> > >    .
> > >    3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
> > >    4. The source archive being votes upon is here:
> > >   
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
> > >    5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
> > >   
> > > https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e
> > >     in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
> > > 
> > > 
> > > When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
> > > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> > > 
> > >     [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.5.0
> > >     [ ]   0 

Re: Storm 2.5.0 Release Candidate Vote

[Richard Zowalla]

I can confirm Julien's finding.

The /public folder is indeed missing from the tar.gz and zip file.

Gruß
Richard

Am Donnerstag, dem 03.08.2023 um 15:04 +0100 schrieb Julien Nioche:
> Thanks Bipin
> 
> The source code in RC3 can now be compiled
> The signatures look OK
> I was able to run a topology in local mode, In deployed mode nimbus
> and the
> supervisor services seem to work fine but not the UI:
> 
> Running: /home/julien/.sdkman/candidates/java/current/bin/java -
> server
> > -Ddaemon.name=ui -Dstorm.options=
> > -Dstorm.home=/home/julien/Downloads/apache-storm-2.5.0
> > -Dstorm.log.dir=/home/julien/Downloads/apache-storm-2.5.0/logs
> > -
> > Djava.library.path=/usr/local/lib:/opt/local/lib:/usr/lib:/usr/lib64
> > -Dstorm.conf.file= -cp
> > /home/julien/Downloads/apache-storm-
> > 2.5.0/*:/home/julien/Downloads/apache-storm-
> > 2.5.0/lib/*:/home/julien/Downloads/apache-storm-
> > 2.5.0/extlib/*:/home/julien/Downloads/apache-storm-2.5.0/extlib-
> > daemon/*:/home/julien/Downloads/apache-storm-2.5.0/lib-
> > webapp/*:/home/julien/Downloads/apache-storm-2.5.0/conf
> > -Xmx768m -Djava.deserialization.disabled=true -Dlogfile.name=ui.log
> > -Dlog4j.configurationFile=/home/julien/Downloads/apache-storm-
> > 2.5.0/log4j2/cluster.xml
> > org.apache.storm.daemon.ui.UIServer
> > Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException: Cannot find
> > static
> > file directory in development location
> > /home/julien/Downloads/apache-storm-2.5.0/lib-webapp/storm-webapp-
> > 2.5.0.jarWEB-INF
> > at org.apache.storm.daemon.ui.UIServer.main(UIServer.java:160)
> 
> 
> The logs contain
> 
> 2023-08-03 14:49:23.728 o.a.s.d.u.UIServer main [WARN] Cannot find
> static
> > file directory in /home/julien/Downloads/apache-storm-2.5.0/public/
> > -
> > assuming that UIServer is being launchedin a development
> > environment and
> > not from a packaged release
> 
> 
> Looking at the RC I see that the folder /public is missing. It was in
> 2.4
> and in the previous RC. When added manually, the storm ui command
> runs fine.
> 
> Sorry to be the bearer of bad news
> 
> Julien
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 3 Aug 2023 at 00:08, Bipin Prasad 
> wrote:
> 
> > Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc3 is here:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc3
> > Please vote on this release.
> > 
> >    1. How to vote is described here:
> > 
> > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
> >    2. Release notes are here:
> > 
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc3/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> >    .
> >    3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
> >    4. The source archive being votes upon is here:
> > 
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc3/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
> >    5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
> > 
> > https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e
> > in
> >    this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
> > 
> > 
> > When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
> > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> > 
> >     [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.5.0
> >     [ ]   0 No opinion
> >     [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> > 
> > Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> > 
> > --Bipin Prasad
> > 
> > On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 8:28 AM Bipin Prasad
> > 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc2 is here:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2
> > > Please vote on this release.
> > > 
> > >    1. How to vote is described here:
> > > 
> > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
> > >    2. Release notes are here:
> > > 
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> > >    .
> > >    3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
> > >    4. The source archive being votes upon is here:
> > > 
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
> > >    5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
> > > 
> > https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e
> > >     in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
> > > 
> > > 
> > > When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
> > > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> > > 
> > >     [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.5.0
> > >     [ ]   0 No opinion
> > >     [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> > > 
> > > Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> > > 
> > > --Bipin Prasad
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 4:15 PM Bipin Prasad
> > > 
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc1 is here:
> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc1
> > > > Please vote on this release.
> > > 

Re: Storm 2.5.0 Release Candidate Vote

[Richard Zowalla]

Hi,

can you close the staging repo on Nexus? Otherwise using the maven
artifacts won't be possible.

@all: Here is the repo for conviniance:



storm-2.5.0-rc3-test
Testing Storm 2.5.0 RC3

https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1108




I will test once the repository is closed.

Thanks for preparing the RC3, Bipin!

Gruß
Richard

Am Mittwoch, dem 02.08.2023 um 16:07 -0700 schrieb Bipin Prasad:
> Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc3 is here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc3
> Please vote on this release.
> 
>    1. How to vote is described here:
>   
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
>    2. Release notes are here:
>   
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc3/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>    .
>    3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
>    4. The source archive being votes upon is here:
>   
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc3/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
>    5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>   
> https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e
>  in
>    this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
> 
> 
> When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> 
>     [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.5.0
>     [ ]   0 No opinion
>     [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> 
> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> 
> --Bipin Prasad
> 
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 8:28 AM Bipin Prasad 
> wrote:
> 
> > Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc2 is here:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2
> > Please vote on this release.
> > 
> >    1. How to vote is described here:
> >   
> > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
> >    2. Release notes are here:
> >   
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> >    .
> >    3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
> >    4. The source archive being votes upon is here:
> >   
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
> >    5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
> >   
> > https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e
> >     in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
> > 
> > 
> > When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
> > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> > 
> >     [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.5.0
> >     [ ]   0 No opinion
> >     [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> > 
> > Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> > 
> > --Bipin Prasad
> > 
> > On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 4:15 PM Bipin Prasad
> > 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc1 is here:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc1
> > > Please vote on this release.
> > > 
> > >    1. How to vote is described here:
> > >   
> > > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
> > >    2. Release notes are here:
> > >   
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> > >    .
> > >    3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
> > >    4. The source archive being votes upon is here:
> > >   
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc1/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
> > >    5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
> > >   
> > > https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e
> > >     in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
> > > 
> > > 
> > > When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
> > > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> > > 
> > >     [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.5.0
> > >     [ ]   0 No opinion
> > >     [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> > > 
> > > Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> > > 
> > > --Bipin Prasad
> > > 
> > 



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Storm 2.5.0 Release Candidate Vote

[Richard Zowalla]

On a clean, vanilla system without a custom maven mirror in place, I am
hitting the same issue.

The problem is, that Hive 2.3.9 declares the conjars.org repo:
https://github.com/apache/hive/blob/rel/release-2.3.9/pom.xml#L225

This is the reason imho, why it gets pulled into our Maven build.

Gruß
Richard


Am Dienstag, dem 01.08.2023 um 15:44 + schrieb Bipin Prasad:
> The failure in your build
>  >
> http://conjars.org/repo/org/pentaho/pentaho-aggdesigner-algorithm/5.1.5-jhyde/pentaho-aggdesigner-algorithm-5.1.5-jhyde.pom
>  connection timeout
> 
> conjars.org does not exist anymore. If this exists in your
> ~/.m2/settings.xml, please remove and retry.
> 
> On 2023/07/28 04:52:21 Derek Dagit wrote:
> > I downloaded the release files:
> > 
> > ∴ wget -r -np
> > 'https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc
> > 2/'
> > 
> > I checked signatures:
> > 
> > ∴ ls *.asc|xargs -n1 gpg --verify
> > gpg: assuming signed data in 'apache-storm-2.5.0.pom'
> > gpg: Signature made Tue 25 Jul 2023 09:33:30 AM CDT
> > gpg:    using RSA key
> > 51379DA8A7AE5B02674EF15C134716AF768D9B6E
> > gpg: Good signature from "Bipin Prasad (For Signing Apache Storm
> > release) " [full]
> > gpg: assuming signed data in 'apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz'
> > gpg: Signature made Tue 25 Jul 2023 09:34:52 AM CDT
> > gpg:    using RSA key
> > 51379DA8A7AE5B02674EF15C134716AF768D9B6E
> > gpg: Good signature from "Bipin Prasad (For Signing Apache Storm
> > release) " [full]
> > gpg: assuming signed data in 'apache-storm-2.5.0-src.zip'
> > gpg: Signature made Tue 25 Jul 2023 09:34:52 AM CDT
> > gpg:    using RSA key
> > 51379DA8A7AE5B02674EF15C134716AF768D9B6E
> > gpg: Good signature from "Bipin Prasad (For Signing Apache Storm
> > release) " [full]
> > gpg: assuming signed data in 'apache-storm-2.5.0.tar.gz'
> > gpg: Signature made Tue 25 Jul 2023 09:33:39 AM CDT
> > gpg:    using RSA key
> > 51379DA8A7AE5B02674EF15C134716AF768D9B6E
> > gpg: Good signature from "Bipin Prasad (For Signing Apache Storm
> > release) " [full]
> > gpg: assuming signed data in 'apache-storm-2.5.0.zip'
> > gpg: Signature made Tue 25 Jul 2023 09:33:39 AM CDT
> > gpg:    using RSA key
> > 51379DA8A7AE5B02674EF15C134716AF768D9B6E
> > gpg: Good signature from "Bipin Prasad (For Signing Apache Storm
> > release) " [full]
> > gpg: assuming signed data in 'RELEASE_NOTES.html'
> > gpg: Signature made Tue 25 Jul 2023 09:47:54 AM CDT
> > gpg:    using RSA key
> > 51379DA8A7AE5B02674EF15C134716AF768D9B6E
> > gpg: Good signature from "Bipin Prasad (For Signing Apache Storm
> > release) " [full]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I checked checksums:
> > 
> > ∴ ls *.sha512|while read f; do gpg --print-md SHA512
> > "${f%%.sha512}" | diff -s - "$f"; done
> > 
> > Each one of these failed because the format does not match what
> > results from
> > following the instructions at
> > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#setting-up-a-vote
> > .
> > 
> > I retried this way:
> > 
> > ∴ ls *.sha512|while read f; do sha512sum "${f%%.sha512}" | diff -s
> > - "$f"; done
> > Files - and apache-storm-2.5.0.pom.asc.sha512 are identical
> > Files - and apache-storm-2.5.0.pom.sha512 are identical
> > Files - and apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz.asc.sha512 are identical
> > Files - and apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz.sha512 are identical
> > Files - and apache-storm-2.5.0-src.zip.asc.sha512 are identical
> > Files - and apache-storm-2.5.0-src.zip.sha512 are identical
> > Files - and apache-storm-2.5.0.tar.gz.asc.sha512 are identical
> > Files - and apache-storm-2.5.0.tar.gz.sha512 are identical
> > Files - and apache-storm-2.5.0.zip.asc.sha512 are identical
> > Files - and apache-storm-2.5.0.zip.sha512 are identical
> > Files - and RELEASE_NOTES.html.asc.sha512 are identical
> > Files - and RELEASE_NOTES.html.sha512 are identical
> > 
> > Looks OK.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Unzipped the source, built and ran tests with `mvn clean && mvn
> > install`
> > 
> > I needed to use the trick at
> > https://stackoverflow.com/a/70673228 to avoid the "Blocked mirror
> > for repositories" error maven throws when trying to download with
> > plain HTTP.
> > 
> > Eventually, the project failed to build because conjars.org was
> > down:
> > 
> > [ERROR] Failed to execute goal on project storm-autocreds: Could
> > not resolve dependencies for project org.apache.storm:storm-
> > autocreds:jar:2.5.0: Failed to collect dependencies at
> > org.apache.hive.hcatalog:hive-webhcat-java-client:jar:2.3.9 ->
> > org.apache.hive.hcatalog:hive-hcatalog-core:jar:2.3.9 ->
> > org.apache.hive:hive-cli:jar:2.3.9 -> org.apache.hive:hive-
> > service:jar:2.3.9 -> org.apache.hive:hive-exec:jar:2.3.9 ->
> > org.pentaho:pentaho-aggdesigner-algorithm:jar:5.1.5-jhyde: Failed
> > to read artifact descriptor for org.pentaho:pentaho-aggdesigner-
> > algorithm:jar:5.1.5-jhyde: Could not transfer artifact
> > 

Re: Storm 2.5.0 Release Candidate Vote

[Richard Zowalla]

Yup. This is snakeyaml 2.0 related.

@Julien: We had a similar issue in SC with version range syntax and snakeyaml 
:-)

Gruß
Richard 

Am 27. Juli 2023 16:13:30 MESZ schrieb Bipin Prasad :
>This appears to be the change in signature in snakeyaml 2.0 (which is used via 
>transitive dependency in storm 2.5.0 release) vs the older smakeyaml 1.2.
>
>The maven artifacts are in apache staging area, for the duration of the vote.
>https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/.  
> (/org/apache/storm//2.5.0)
>
>
>On 2023/07/27 08:21:45 Julien Nioche wrote:
>> Thanks Bipin,
>> 
>> Are the Maven artefacts for the RC available somewhere?
>> 
>> I am trying to run a Flux topology in local mode with code compiled with a
>> dependency on 2.4 and am getting
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> *09:07:27.820 [main] ERROR o.a.s.s.o.a.z.s.NIOServerCnxnFactory - Thread
>> Thread[main,5,main] diedjava.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException: null
>> at jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>> ~[?:?] at
>> jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:77)
>> ~[?:?] at
>> jdk.internal.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
>> ~[?:?] at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:568) ~[?:?] at
>> org.apache.storm.LocalCluster.lambda$main$1(LocalCluster.java:401)
>> ~[storm-server-2.5.0.jar:2.5.0] at
>> org.apache.storm.LocalCluster.withLocalModeOverride(LocalCluster.java:349)
>> ~[storm-server-2.5.0.jar:2.5.0] at
>> org.apache.storm.LocalCluster.main(LocalCluster.java:394)
>> ~[storm-server-2.5.0.jar:2.5.0]Caused by: java.lang.NoSuchMethodError:
>> 'void org.yaml.snakeyaml.constructor.Constructor.(java.lang.Class)'
>> at org.apache.storm.flux.parser.FluxParser.yaml(FluxParser.java:203)
>> ~[opencrawl-1.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:?] at
>> org.apache.storm.flux.parser.FluxParser.parseInputStream(FluxParser.java:107)
>> ~[opencrawl-1.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:?] at
>> org.apache.storm.flux.parser.FluxParser.parseFile(FluxParser.java:68)
>> ~[opencrawl-1.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:?] at
>> org.apache.storm.flux.Flux.runCli(Flux.java:167)
>> ~[opencrawl-1.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:?] at
>> org.apache.storm.flux.Flux.main(Flux.java:119)
>> ~[opencrawl-1.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:?] ... 7 more09:07:29.138 [SessionTracker]
>> INFO  o.a.s.s.o.a.z.s.SessionTrackerImpl - SessionTrackerImpl exited loop!*
>> Being able to access the artefacts would help recompile and track
>> incompatibility between versions.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Julien
>> 
>> On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 at 16:29, Bipin Prasad  wrote:
>> 
>> > Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc2 is here:
>> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2
>> > Please vote on this release.
>> >
>> >1. How to vote is described here:
>> >
>> > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
>> >2. Release notes are here:
>> >
>> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>> >.
>> >3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
>> >4. The source archive being votes upon is here:
>> >
>> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc2/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
>> >5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>> >
>> > https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e
>> > in
>> >this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
>> >
>> >
>> > When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
>> > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>> >
>> > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.5.0
>> > [ ]   0 No opinion
>> > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>> >
>> > Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
>> >
>> > --Bipin Prasad
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 4:15 PM Bipin Prasad 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Storm Release candidate version 2.5.0 rc1 is here:
>> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc1
>> > > Please vote on this release.
>> > >
>> > >1. How to vote is described here:
>> > >
>> > https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/RELEASING.md#how-to-vote-on-a-release-candidate
>> > >2. Release notes are here:
>> > >
>> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>> > >.
>> > >3. The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.5.0:
>> > >4. The source archive being votes upon is here:
>> > >
>> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.5.0-rc1/apache-storm-2.5.0-src.tar.gz
>> > >5. The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>> > >
>> > https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get=0x134716af768d9b6e
>> > > in this file https://www.apache.org/dist/storm/KEYS
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release.
>> > > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>> > >
>> > > [ 

Re: Storm Cassandra

[Richard Zowalla]

The PR by Bipin seems to fix it? ;)

Am Freitag, dem 16.06.2023 um 20:19 +0200 schrieb Richard Zowalla:
> Ok from looking into gitact-script.sh, it looks like we are skipping
> storm-cassandra, storm-hive, storm-hdfs, storm-hbase, storm-sql,
> storm-
> hdfs-blobstore if we are building with Java 11 and run them with Java
> 8. That explains why Java 11 runs do not fail ;-)
> 
> Nevertheless, we have runs, which are just working fine with Java 8.
> If
> we fail, we fail (at the moment) on pull requests with a JVM crash,
> see
> [1].
> 
> It seems, that we are already running with 3g memory, so it might not
> be the root problem, but could be related (due to GH action limits /
> overall consumption in the org).
> 
> On master, it seems to be fine (just happens on some PRs).
> 
> [1] https://gist.github.com/rzo1/5aa510022f27bdf3c8eda66089774b68
> 
> 
> Am Freitag, dem 16.06.2023 um 17:25 + schrieb Bipin Prasad:
> >  Created Jira [STORM-3923] Cassandra module fails tests probably
> > OOM
> > - ASF JIRA . I think mvn test is using 3gb (inherited from main
> > pom.xml), but will add directly in its pom under Cassandra. Also
> > MAVEN_OPTS in git actions is set to 1.5gb. I wonder if that is
> > limiting the memory.
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  | 
> > [STORM-3923] Cassandra module fails tests probably OOM - ASF JIRA
> > 
> > 
> >  |
> > 
> >  |
> > 
> >  |
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >     On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 09:58:32 AM PDT, Richard Zowalla
> >  wrote:  
> >  
> >  Hi,
> > 
> > looks like it only falls occasionally in Java 8 with an OOM issue /
> > JVM crash. Might be possible to just increase the JVM memory for
> > that
> > module. 
> > 
> > I remember from the Travis migration, that we had some heap
> > adjustments in the scripts. Wdyt?
> > 
> > Gruß
> > Richard 
> > 
> > Am 16. Juni 2023 17:57:21 MESZ schrieb Bipin Prasad
> > :
> > > All,
> > >   I am working on creating a new release for Storm 2.5.0.
> > > Unfortunately,
> > > storm-cassandra has been failing tests since we moved to Git
> > > Actions. Can
> > > someone take a look at it and possibly get it to work - with a
> > > newer
> > > version of Cassandra if possible and/or upgraded tests?
> > > 
> > >   If no one is using Storm Cassandra (under xternal/storm-
> > > cassandra), I
> > > can exclude this from the build and release). Open to other
> > > suggestions.
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > > --Bipin
> >   
> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Call for PMC Members and Contributors

[Richard Zowalla]

Don't want to come across as an annoying user, but have we made any
progress in this area yet? Everyone who has expressed interest
(usually) doesn't have read access to private@, so no one knows what
the current status is regarding the continuation of the project by
expanding the committer / pmc circle. CC'ing private@, so we can
hopefully get an update.

I am asking because I read about the intention to cut a storm 2.5.0
release and I am wondering, if we get the necessary votes in a timely
manner. 

Gruß
Richard

Am Montag, dem 12.06.2023 um 12:06 +0200 schrieb Alexandre
Vermeerbergen:
> +1
> 
> Le lun. 12 juin 2023 à 11:57, Richard Zowalla  a
> écrit :
> > 
> > Some weeks passed, any updates?
> > 
> > Gruß
> > Richard
> > 
> > Am Donnerstag, dem 11.05.2023 um 19:16 -0400 schrieb P. Taylor
> > Goetz:
> > > Thanks for the reminder Richard,
> > > 
> > > In response, I’ve bumped the PMC-private discussion around adding
> > > new
> > > members interested in contributing.
> > > 
> > > - Taylor
> > > 
> > > > On May 11, 2023, at 8:39 AM, Richard Zowalla 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Hello,
> > > > 
> > > > I know we are all busy with our day jobs, but is there any
> > > > news?
> > > > 
> > > > We had some activity after a move to the attic was proposed. In
> > > > the
> > > > process, a few people volunteered to help with the project.
> > > > 
> > > > A few weeks later, IMHO we are back to where we were before the
> > > > proposal. Mails are going nowhere and I've heard of a few
> > > > people
> > > > planning to just fork Storm to get an updated version into
> > > > production.
> > > > 
> > > > If we want to prevent that and Storm should really be put into
> > > > maintenance mode, then we should urgently take care of
> > > > expanding
> > > > the PMC/Committers circle, so that we are able to put out
> > > > timely
> > > > releases again and the work regarding maintenance is
> > > > distributed on
> > > > more than just 2 shoulders.
> > > > 
> > > > Don't take it as a rant, it's just my opinion as someone who
> > > > runs a
> > > > Storm Cluster in production and would love to help the project
> > > > to
> > > > sustain.
> > > > 
> > > > Gruß
> > > > Richard
> > > > 
> > > > On 2023/05/02 12:58:00 Richard Zowalla wrote:
> > > > > Any updates? :-)
> > > > > 
> > > > > Think Storm would benefit from a new release soon...
> > > > > 
> > > > > Am Mittwoch, dem 22.02.2023 um 18:02 -0500 schrieb P. Taylor
> > > > > Goetz:
> > > > > > Quick update:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The ASF Board voted to accept both our report and the
> > > > > > resolution to
> > > > > > change PMC Chair. Board feedback on our report was
> > > > > > positive.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The next step is to expand the the PMC/Committers group.
> > > > > > Official
> > > > > > votes will necessarily be private, but I see no reason
> > > > > > nominations
> > > > > > can’t be public.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > So lets open a thread to talk about adding new contributors
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > PMC. Feel free to:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 1. Volunteer to support the project as a PMC
> > > > > > Member/Committer..
> > > > > > 2. Nominate someone become PMC/Committer
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I have a few candidates in mind, and will follow up
> > > > > > accordingly.
> > > > > > Votes for new members will be private, but successful votes
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > new
> > > > > > members will be announced on the public lists.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > One important way to contribute is to volunteer as a
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > manager
> > > > > > for any given release, even if we release infrequently
> > > > > > (e.g.
> > > > > > only in
> > > > > > response to a serious bug or security issue. I don’t have
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > bandwidth to act in that role, though I will commit to
> > > > > > support
> > > > > > voting
> > > > > > on releases, etc. Ideally we would want at least two folks
> > > > > > ready to
> > > > > > step into that role, but we can get by with one if
> > > > > > necessary.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Thanks again to everyone who’s expressed interest in
> > > > > > contributing to
> > > > > > the project.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > - Taylor
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > 
> >