Re: Questions about Zookeeper

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi Aditya,

If it's related to security related items then please visit
https://zookeeper.apache.org/security.html and follow the steps.

Otherwise, Please feel free to post your queries here. Some of us will
pitch in and will look at it.

Following are a few sets of docs related to the atomic broadcast protocol
for a quick reference. Hope you saw these and added them here fyki.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Zab.
https://zookeeper.apache.org/doc/r3.7.0/zookeeperInternals.html#sc_atomicBroadcast
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/24193445/zookeeper-internals.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1295034038000&api=v2
https://marcoserafini.github.io/papers/zab.pdf

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 7:45 AM Aditya Patruni 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> May I email this DL with questions about the ZAB? Or is there a
> separate DL/forum for questions.
>
> Thank you,
> Aditya

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.7.0 candidate 2

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

+1 (binding)


- built ZooKeeper jar from source

- setup 3 node ZK cluster and tested a few cases(HDFS-HA failover and java
zkClient ops), exec basic CLI commands, checked jmx beans and all looks
fine to me.

- verified sig/xsum.


Thanks Damien and others who have worked on making this release happen!


Rakesh

On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 4:36 PM Damien Diederen 
wrote:

>
> Greetings, all!
>
> After a long delay, here is a third release candidate for ZooKeeper 3.7.0.
>
> Compared to RC1, it contains... quite a few changes.  It notably fixes
> the quota feature for multi transactions, repairs the test suite on
> macOS (Catalina), makes a few tests less flaky, and avoids a CVE.
>
> The complete set of changes can be obtained with the Git range
> expression 'release-3.7.0-1..release-3.7.0-2', or on GitHub at:
>
>
> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/compare/release-3.7.0-1...release-3.7.0-2
>
> I cannot say that I find the state of the test suite satisfactory, but
> the failures which are often observed are due to timing and/or TCP/IP
> port assignment issues, and repeated runs are "sufficient" to clear
> them.
>
> I was hoping to contribute more on that front, but have been unable so
> far, and don't want to keep the 3.7 branch hostage—so here is a timid
> RC2.
>
>
> ZooKeeper 3.7.0 introduces a number of new features, notably:
>
>   * An API to start a ZooKeeper server from Java (ZOOKEEPER-3874);
>
>   * Quota enforcement (ZOOKEEPER-3301);
>
>   * Host name canonicalization in quorum SASL authentication
> (ZOOKEEPER-4030);
>
>   * Support for BCFKS key/trust store format (ZOOKEEPER-3950);
>
>   * A choice of mandatory authentication scheme(s) (ZOOKEEPER-3561);
>
>   * A "whoami" API and CLI command (ZOOKEEPER-3969);
>
>   * The possibility of disabling digest authentication (ZOOKEEPER-3979);
>
>   * Multiple SASL "superUsers" (ZOOKEEPER-3959);
>
>   * Fast-tracking of throttled requests (ZOOKEEPER-3683);
>
>   * Additional security metrics (ZOOKEEPER-3978);
>
>   * SASL support in the C and Perl clients (ZOOKEEPER-1112,
> ZOOKEEPER-3714);
>
>   * A new zkSnapshotComparer.sh tool (ZOOKEEPER-3427);
>
>   * Notes on how to benchmark ZooKeeper with the YCSB tool
> (ZOOKEEPER-3264).
>
>
> The release notes are available here:
>
>
> https://people.apache.org/~ddiederen/zookeeper-3.7.0-candidate-2/website/releasenotes.html
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310801&version=12346617
>
> *** Please download, test and vote by March 21st 2021, 23:59 UTC+0. ***
>
> Source files:
>
>   https://people.apache.org/~ddiederen/zookeeper-3.7.0-candidate-2/
>
> Maven staging repo:
>
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachezookeeper-1067/
>
> The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: release-3.7.0-2
>
>   https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/tree/release-3.7.0-2
>
> ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
>
>   https://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
>
> The staging version of the website is:
>
>
> https://people.apache.org/~ddiederen/zookeeper-3.7.0-candidate-2/website/
>
>
> Should we release this candidate?
>
>
> Damien Diederen
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.5 candidate 6

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

+1

- built ZooKeeper jar from source
- tested using 3 node cluster, ran smoke test scenarios, ran command line
client, checked jmx beans and LGTM.
- verified sig/xsum, release notes looks fine.

Thanks Andor and others who have worked on making this release happen!

Rakesh

On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 6:04 PM Andor Molnar  wrote:

> This is the first stable release of 3.5 branch: 3.5.5. It resolves 117
> issues, including Maven migration, Quorum TLS, TTL nodes and lots of other
> performance and stability improvements.
>
> The full release notes is available at:
>
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310801&version=12343268
>
> *** Please download, test and vote by May 10th 2019, 23:59 UTC+0. ***
>
> Source files:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/zookeeper/zookeeper-3.5.5-rc6/
>
> Maven staging repos:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/zookeeper/parent/3.5.5/
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/zookeeper/zookeeper-jute/3.5.5/
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.5.5/
>
> The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: release-3.5.5-rc6
>
> ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
>
> Should we release this candidate?
>
>

Re: Zookeeper at Twitter by Micheal

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Great article Michael. Appreciate all the efforts in making this blog!

Cheers,
Rakesh

On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 1:56 PM Norbert Kalmar 
wrote:

> Good blog post!
> Can't wait for the PRs ;)
> I'm very positive about ZooKeeper's future (heard lot of talks lately about
> etcd overthrowing ZooKeeper - no chance :) )
>
> Norbert
>
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 10:39 PM Andor Molnár  wrote:
>
> > Great stuff Michael!
> >
> >
> > Andor
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10/14/2018 12:26 AM, Enrico Olivelli wrote:
> > > Hi Michael,
> > > I just stepped into this very interesting post !
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://blog.twitter.com/engineering/en_us/topics/infrastructure/2018/zookeeper-at-twitter.html
> > >
> > > Thank you
> > > Enrico
> >
> >
>

Re: Test failures (SASL) with Java 11 - any ideas?

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

  Do you know why 3.4 is not using kerby?

In short, Kerby was failing with java-6.  Please refer jira:
https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2689

"ZooKeeper runs in Java, release 1.6 or greater (JDK 6 or greater)."
https://zookeeper.apache.org/doc/r3.4.13/zookeeperAdmin.html


Rakesh

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 9:06 PM, Enrico Olivelli 
wrote:

>
>
> Il sab 21 lug 2018, 17:17 Patrick Hunt  ha scritto:
>
>> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 1:21 AM Enrico Olivelli 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Il sab 21 lug 2018, 09:22 Patrick Hunt  ha scritto:
>> >
>> > > Interestingly I don't see the auth tests that are failing in 3.4
>> failing
>> > on
>> > > trunk (they pass), instead a number of tests fail with "Address
>> already
>> > in
>> > > use"
>> > >
>> > >
>> > https://builds.apache.org/view/S-Z/view/ZooKeeper/job/
>> ZooKeeper-trunk-java11/3/#showFailuresLink
>> > >
>> > > 3.4 is using
>> > > > value="2.0.0-M15"/>
>> > > 
>> > > while trunk moved to kerby, wonder if that could be it (sasl fails at
>> > > least)?
>> > > 
>> > >
>> >
>> > True.
>> > I can't find any report of errors about Kerby + jdk11 by googling a
>> little.
>> > Maybe we are the first :)
>> >
>> >
>> To be clear it looks like kerby (master) is working while directory (3.4)
>> is not - perhaps we need to update?
>>
>
> Do you know why 3.4 is not using kerby?
>
> Enrico
>
>
>> Patrick
>>
>>
>> > I did not start to run extensive tests of my applications on jdk11, I
>> will
>> > start next week.
>> >
>> > While switching from 8 to 10 I had problems with a bunch of fixes on
>> > Kerberos impl in java which made tests not work on testing environments
>> due
>> > to stricter check about the env
>> >
>> > Enrico
>> >
>> >
>> > > Patrick
>> > >
>> > > On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 12:02 AM Patrick Hunt 
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Thanks Enrico. Possible. However afaict Jenkins is running build 19
>> > > (build
>> > > > 11-ea+19) and I didn't notice anything obvious in the notes for 19+
>> > > related
>> > > > to sasl/kerb.
>> > > >
>> > > > Patrick
>> > > >
>> > > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 11:48 PM Enrico Olivelli <
>> eolive...@gmail.com>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> In java11 there are a bunch of news about Kerberos, maybe it is
>> > related
>> > > >>
>> > > >> http://jdk.java.net/11/release-notes
>> > > >>
>> > > >> My 2 cents
>> > > >> Enrico
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Il sab 21 lug 2018, 08:03 Patrick Hunt  ha
>> scritto:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> > Hey folks, I added a couple Jenkins jobs based on Java 11 which
>> is
>> > set
>> > > >> to
>> > > >> > release in September. Jenkins is running a pre-release
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> > https://builds.apache.org/view/S-Z/view/ZooKeeper/job/
>> ZooKeeper_branch34_java11/
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > java version "11-ea" 2018-09-25
>> > > >> > Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment 18.9 (build 11-ea+19)
>> > > >> > Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM 18.9 (build 11-ea+19, mixed
>> mode)
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > Anyone have insight into what's failing here?
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > 2018-07-20 14:39:27,126 [myid:2] - ERROR
>> > > >> > [QuorumConnectionThread-[myid=2]-3:QuorumCnxManager@268] -
>> > Exception
>> > > >> > while connecting, id: [0, localhost/127.0.0.1:11223], addr: {},
>> > > >> > closing learner connection
>> > > >> > javax.security.sasl.SaslException: An error:
>> > > >> > (java.security.PrivilegedActionException:
>> > > >> > javax.security.sasl.SaslException: GSS initiate failed [Caused
>> by
>> > > >> > GSSException: No valid credentials provided (Mechanism level:
>> > Message
>> > > >> > stream modified (41) - Message stream modified)]) occurred when
>> > > >> > evaluating Zookeeper Quorum Member's  received SASL token.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > ...
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > Entered Krb5Context.initSecContext with state=STATE_NEW
>> > > >> > Found ticket for lear...@example.com to go to
>> > > >> > krbtgt/example@example.com expiring on Sat Jul 21 14:39:01
>> UTC
>> > > >> > 2018
>> > > >> > Service ticket not found in the subject
>> > > >> > 2018-07-20 14:39:27,127 [myid:0] - ERROR
>> > > >> > [QuorumConnectionThread-[myid=0]-2:SaslQuorumAuthServer@133] -
>> > Failed
>> > > >> > to authenticate using SASL
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> > https://builds.apache.org/view/S-Z/view/ZooKeeper/job/
>> ZooKeeper_branch34_java11/2/#showFailuresLink
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > Patrick
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> --
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> -- Enrico Olivelli
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > --
>> >
>> >
>> > -- Enrico Olivelli
>> >
>>
> --
>
>
> -- Enrico Olivelli
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.13 candidate 1

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

 Thanks Michael for putting up the RC.

+1

Verified using java version "1.8.0_45" and CentOS "7.3.1611" env.

- built from source.
- ran unit tests, all passed.
- created 3 node cluster, performed basic zk cmds, jmx and a couple of
4lws, looks fine.
- release notes looks good.


Rakesh


On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 9:23 PM, Andor Molnar 
wrote:

> +1
>
> - signatures verified
> - successfully run java/c++ unit test suite on CentOS 7
> - tested 1,3,7 node clusters
> - tested rolling upgrade from version 3.4.12
> - ran a few smoke tests manually
>
> Thanks,
> Andor
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 10:54 AM, Enrico Olivelli 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non binding)
> >
> > Checked signatures/md5/sha1
> > Built from source and run Java tests on Fedora 26
> >
> > I am not able to run CPPUNIT tests on Fedora 26, I think this is not a
> real
> > blocker, I never run those tests on other releases, So I can't tell this
> is
> > a regression.
> > This is my case
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-3075
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> >
> > Il giorno dom 1 lug 2018 alle ore 02:17 Michael Han  ha
> > scritto:
> >
> > > This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.13. It fixes 17 issues,
> > > including issues such as ZOOKEEPER-2959
> > >  that could
> cause
> > > data loss when observer is used, and ZOOKEEPER-2184
> > >  that prevents
> > > ZooKeeper Java clients working in dynamic IP (container / cloud)
> > > environment.
> > >
> > > The full release notes is available at:
> > >
> > > *
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> > projectId=12310801&version=12342973
> > > <
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> > projectId=12310801&version=12342973
> > > >*
> > >
> > > *** Please download, test and vote by July 7th 2018, 23:59 UTC+0. ***
> > >
> > > Source files:
> > > *http://people.apache.org/~hanm/zookeeper/zookeeper-3.4.13-rc1/
> > > *
> > >
> > > Maven staging repo:
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/
> > > apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.13/
> > >
> > > The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: release-3.4.13-rc1
> > >
> > > ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > > http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
> > >
> > > Should we release this candidate?
> > >
> >
>

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New ZooKeeper committer: Andor Molnar

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

 Congratulations Andor, keep up the great work!

Thanks,
Rakesh


On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 7:17 PM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> The Apache ZooKeeper PMC recently extended committer karma to Andor and he
> has accepted. Andor has made some great contributions and we are looking
> forward to even more :)
>
> Congratulations and welcome aboard Andor!
>
> Patrick
>

Re: Let's cut a ZK 3.5.4-beta release

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

I have added my feedback to the PR. Please take a look at it.


Rakesh

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 8:38 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> No one has looked at 2901, while I'm not super happy with it it seems fine
> - I'll commit it as-is if I don't hear anything by EOD tomorrow (Monday).
> After which I'll start the release process.
>
> Patrick
>
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 2:09 AM, Andor Molnar  wrote:
>
> > I'm currently working on ZOOKEEPER-2184. PR has been open for ages on 3.4
> > branch, please review if you have some capacity.
> > I'll port the fix to the 3.5 branch too, if we have an agreement and
> > 3.4-version is merged.
> >
> > ZK-2982 is somewhat related, I believe my changes will fix that one too.
> >
> > ZK-1818 is probably tough, but patch is already available. Somebody
> should
> > pick it up, which I'm happy to do once finished with above stuff.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Andor
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 3:39 AM, Michael Han  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 on 3.5.4 release planning.
> > >
> > > >> There are 10 open blocker issues marked for 3.5.4. Can I get some
> help
> > > to sort out those issues?
> > >
> > > The url posted does not work for me, here is the query I use:
> > > https://goo.gl/3MJZMN
> > >
> > > Just had a chance to go through the JIRA and did some clean ups.
> > > - 1159: lower the priority from blocker to major.
> > > - 761: resolved because the code is merged.
> > >
> > > ZOOKEEPER-2903, 2184, 2982 looks like real blockers for the 3.5.4
> > release.
> > > The rest of the blockers are legacy that's get postponed indefinitely.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 11:59 AM, Flavio Junqueira 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ok, I can have a look at ZK-2901. I'd like to get ZK-2982 in as well
> as
> > > it
> > > > is causing us problems with Kubernetes. The fix is simple, but I'm
> > > > wondering about adding a test case.
> > > >
> > > > -Flavio
> > > >
> > > > > On 14 Mar 2018, at 17:30, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to cut 3.5.4. Need more eyes on 2901 though.
> > > > >
> > > > > Patrick
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 4:26 AM, Flavio Junqueira 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> I think ZK-2901 is close to being merged, yes? And with that, will
> > we
> > > > cut
> > > > >> a 3.5.4 release?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -Flavio
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> On 7 Dec 2017, at 00:27, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I haven't forgotten about this - we've been stuck on
> ZOOKEEPER-2901
> > > . I
> > > > >>> think we getting closer but it's been tricky to navigate
> addressing
> > > the
> > > > >>> issue vs backward compat vs making things worse. I was about to
> > sign
> > > > off
> > > > >>> then noticed I had missed something. Jordan has been working to
> > > > address.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Camille, Edward -- it would be good if you could take a look at
> > 2901
> > > > >> given
> > > > >>> you participated in the original creation/commit of this feature.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Regards,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Patrick
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:32 AM, Karan Mehta <
> > > karanmeht...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > >  Can we get ZOOKEEPER-2770
> > > >   in as
> > well?
> > > > The
> > > > >> PR
> > > >  is ready for review at https://github.com/apache/
> > zookeeper/pull/307
> > > >  It will be a nice feature addition. Thanks!
> > > > 
> > > >  Regards
> > > >  Karan
> > > >  ᐧ
> > > > 
> > > >  On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
> > > >  jor...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > >> Afaict the only real blocker for the release at this point is
> > > > >> ZOOKEEPER-2901 - Jordan can you resolve the comments, after
> > which
> > > we
> > > > > should
> > > > >> be good to go. LMK if there's anything I'm missing.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll have this done in the next day or so. Please wait for me
> if
> > > you
> > > > >> can!
> > > > >
> > > > > -Jordan
> > > > 
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Migrate ZK to Maven build

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

I really appreciate your initiative!

+1

On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 7:36 PM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:

> Definitely +1
>
> > On 20 Apr 2018, at 16:06, Norbert Kalmar  wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Let's start a vote on migrating to maven instead of ant.
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-3021
> >
> > *Shall we migrate ZooKeeper build from ant to Maven?*
> >
> > Please reply with [Yes / +1] or [No / -1] to this thread.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Norbert
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.12 candidate 1

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

+1

Verified using jdk 1.8.0_111 and CentOS 7.3.1611 env

- successfully compiled and ran the tests, all passed.
- xsum/sig verified, OK.
- set up 3 node cluster, verified through zk cmds and a couple of 4lws,
looks fine.


Rakesh

On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 12:25 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> +1. sig/xsum verified, RAT ran OK. I tested a few operational scenarios
> which seemed fine. Ran the tests and they passed. LGTM.
>
> Patrick
>
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:05 PM, Abraham Fine  wrote:
>
> > This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.12. It fixes 22 issues,
> > including issues that
> > affect incorrect handling of the dataDir and the dataLogDir.
> >
> > This candidate fixes an issue in the release notes of candidate 0.
> >
> > The full release notes are available at:
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> > projectId=12310801&version=12342040
> >
> > *** Please download, test and vote by March 31st 2018, 23:59 UTC+0. ***
> >
> > Source files:
> > http://people.apache.org/~afine/zookeeper-3.4.12-candidate-1/
> >
> > Maven staging repo:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/
> > apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.12/
> >
> > The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: release-3.4.12-rc1
> >
> > ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
> >
> > Should we release this candidate?
> >
>

Re: 3.4.12

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Appreciate Abe for the initiative and efforts!

+1, for "3.4.12" releasing.

Please feel free to ping me if any help needed when making this release.

Regards,
Rakesh

On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 4:19 AM, Abraham Fine  wrote:

> I am very much interested in taking a turn as a RM and I think it is a
> great time to do a release (now that 2967, 2249, and 2960 arge merged in).
>
> I agree that ZOOKEEPER-2184 can be pushed again and I don't think there is
> anything else that we need to merge in before cutting a release.
>
> Abe
>
> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018, at 21:52, Patrick Hunt wrote:
> > There are 19 resolved issues http://bit.ly/2oK9aTx
> > and 14 unresolved http://bit.ly/2oFWywS
> > ZOOKEEPER-2184 is the only unresolved blocker, however that's not a
> > regression and was pushed from 3.4.11, we could do so again given it's
> > still being worked on.
> >
> > Abe are you interested in taking a turn as RM?
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Andor Molnar  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi dev,
> > >
> > > User has recently run into the regression of 3.4.11 (ZOOKEEPER-2960
> > > ) (again?)
> > > Are we good to cut 3.4.12 soon or still waiting for something to be
> > > committed?
> > >
> > > Andor
> > >
>

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New ZooKeeper committer: Abraham Fine

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Congrats Abe! Well deserved.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 5:52 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> The Apache ZooKeeper PMC recently extended committer karma to Abe and he
> has accepted. Abe has made some great contributions and we are looking
> forward to even more :)
>
> Congratulations and welcome aboard Abe!
>
> Patrick
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.11 candidate 1

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks for making the release.

Here is my +1.

Verified using jdk 1.8.0_111 and CentOS 7.3.1611 env

- checked previously reported cases of 'readme.md' and rc tag, looks good.
- xsum/sig verified.
- release note looks good.
- setup a small 3 node cluster.
- ran command line zk client - create & delete set of child znodes, get
data, set data znode.
- ran few 4lw commands.
- ran unit test, looks good.


Rakesh

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> I ran a number of tests in addition to what's documented on the cwiki.
> Including bringing up ensembles of various sizes. All seemed fine to me.
>
> I'm +1.
>
> Patrick
>
> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Abraham Fine  wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > - Verified signatures and xsums for tarball and jar
> > - Successfully compiled and ran the tests (using java 1.8.0_152-ea)
> > - Checked the documentation
> > - Spun up 3 node cluster
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 3, 2017, at 09:50, Andor Molnar wrote:
> > > Sent too early.
> > >
> > > - also verified JMX beans
> > >
> > > On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Andor Molnar 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Pat,
> > > >
> > > > I've done verification with JDK 1.7.0_141 on my mac desktop:
> > > >
> > > > - signatures verified.
> > > > - started a few different cluster sizes(1,3,5).
> > > > - ran command line zk client - create, delete, get data, set data
> > znode.
> > > > - ran few 4lw commands.
> > > > - ran unit test, looks good.
> > > >
> > > > Not sure if it's a problem, but md5/sha1 signature files in
> dist-maven
> > > > folder contain only the hash, but not filename. I was unable to
> verify
> > them
> > > > with standard md5sum/sha1sum commands.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Andor
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:14 PM, Patrick Hunt 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.11. It fixes 53 issues.
> > > >>
> > > >> The full release notes is available at:
> > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> > > >> projectId=12310801&version=12339207
> > > >>
> > > >> *** Please download, test and vote by November 6th 2017, 23:59
> UTC+0.
> > ***
> > > >>
> > > >> Source files:
> > > >> *https://people.apache.org/~phunt/zookeeper-3.4.11-candidate-1/*
> > > >> 
> > > >>
> > > >> Maven staging repo:
> > > >> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/
> > > >> apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.11/
> > > >>
> > > >> The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon:
> release-3.4.11-rc1
> > > >>
> > > >> ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the
> release:
> > > >> http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
> > > >>
> > > >> Should we release this candidate?
> > > >>
> > > >> Regards,
> > > >>
> > > >> Patrick
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.11 candidate 0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thank you Pat for getting this out.

I'm adding few observations,
(1) "$ZK_HOME/zookeeper-3.4.11/README.md" is missing in the tar ball. I
could see recently renamed 'README.txt' to 'README.md' and requires
build.xml changes to include this.
(2) I failed to see release tag. Step-9 in
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease+using+git

The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: release-3.4.11-rc0
https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/tree/release-3.4.11-rc0


Apart from the above, rc looks good to me.

+1

I've done verification with jdk 1.8.0_111 and CentOS 7.3.1611 env:-

- xsum/sig verified.
- checked release note, looks good.
- started a few different cluster sizes(1,3,5).
- ran command line zk client - create, delete, get data, set data znode.
- verified jmx beans.
- ran few 4lw commands.
- ran unit test, looks good.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 7:04 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.11. It fixes 53 issues.
>
> The full release notes is available at:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> projectId=12310801&version=12339207
>
> *** Please download, test and vote by October 27th 2017, 23:59 UTC+0. ***
>
> Source files:
> https://home.apache.org/~phunt/zookeeper-3.4.11-candidate-0/
>
> Maven staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/
> apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.11/
>
> The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: release-3.4.11-rc0
>
> ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
>
> Should we release this candidate?
>
> Regards,
>
> Patrick
>

Re: New PMC Member: Michael Han

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Congratulations Michael!

Keep up the great efforts!


Rakesh

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:

> I'm very happy to announce that the Apache ZooKeeper PMC has voted to
> invite Michael Han to join the PMC and Michael accepted. Michael has done
> outstanding work in the community over the recent past and we felt it was
> time for Michael to deepen his level of engagement by joining the PMC.
>
> Please join me in congratulating Michael for his achievement.
> Congratulations, Michael!
>
> -Flavio
>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.3-beta candidate 1

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks, Michael, for your efforts to get this release out.

+1

- built zookeeper jar from source with jdk1.8.0_45
- ran zk unit test suite, all passed
- tested with a couple of different ensemble sizes, exec basic cli
commands, jmx beans
- verified sig/xsum
- checked release notes


Rakesh

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Mohammad Arshad <
arshad.mohamma...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
> Run all tests on Ubuntu 15.10 on java 7.
> Built tar ball on Ubuntu and Windows.
> Run releaseaudit
> Generated documentation
> Verified basic features, create znode,delete znode, get data, set data, get
> acl, set acl etc.
> Verified 4lw commands.
> Verified CLI commands
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Michael Han  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > This is the second release candidate (RC1) of 3.5.3-beta, following the
> > first release candidate (RC0) cut off last week [1]. It fixes incorrect
> > Implementation-Version information contained in the manifest file of the
> > generated artifacts. There is no code changes, just regenerated and
> > resigned artifacts.
> >
> > The full release notes are available at:
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> > projectId=12310801&version=12335444
> >
> >  Please download, test and vote by April 8th 2017, 23:59 UTC+0. 
> >
> > Source files:
> > https://home.apache.org/~hanm/zookeeper/zookeeper-3.5.3-beta-rc1/
> >
> > Maven staging repo:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/
> > apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.5.3-beta/
> >
> > The tag to be voted upon:
> > *https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/tree/release-3.5.3-rc1
> > *
> >
> > ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
> >
> > Should we release this candidate?
> >
> > [1]
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/20170
> 3.mbox/%3CCA%
> > 2Bi0x1LTONuaT6H%2BiOHAT2O1SVPKnQzzQh8vKMzWJVijCrHUrw%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> >
> > --
> > Cheers
> > Michael.
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.3-beta candidate 0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Good Work! Thanks Michael for making 3.5.3 beta release.

Noticed one thing in
http://people.apache.org/~hanm/zookeeper/zookeeper-3.5.3-beta-rc0/zookeeper-3.5.3-beta.tar.gz
artifact.
"zookeeper-3.5.3-beta/zookeeper-3.5.3-beta/zookeeper-3.5.3-beta.jar/META-INF/MANIFEST.MF"
contains details of "3.6.0 SNAPHOT" version instead "3.5.3-beta" version.


Rakesh

On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 2:44 AM, Michael Han  wrote:

> Thanks Pat for your vote!
>
> Friendly nudge to all developers: we have 4 days left before the voting
> ends. Please help on vote the release by trying out this release candidate.
> This is one of the cases that you don't have to spend a huge amount of time
> but still make good impact on this project :)
>
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>
> > +1 sig/xsum verified, RAT ran clean, tests all passed. I was able to run
> 3
> > and 23 ensemble sizes. Also tested 3.4.9 client against this RC and it
> > worked fine (through the cli shell).
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 8:30 PM, Michael Han  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > With heartfelt thanks to many contributors, the RC0 for 3.5.3-beta is
> > > ready.
> > >
> > > 3.5.3-beta is the first beta in the planned 3.5 release line leading up
> > to
> > > a stable 3.5 release. It comprises 76 fixes, improvements, and new
> > > features since
> > > 3.5.2-alpha was released on July 20th, 2016.
> > >
> > > This release includes important security fix around dynamic reconfigure
> > > API, improvements on test infrastructure, and new features such as TTL
> > > node. The full release notes are available at:
> > >
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> > > projectId=12310801&version=12335444
> > >
> > >
> > >  Please download, test and vote by April 4th 2017, 23:59 UTC+0.
> 
> > >
> > > Source files:
> > > *https://home.apache.org/~hanm/zookeeper/zookeeper-3.5.3-beta-rc0/
> > > *
> > >
> > > Maven staging repo:
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/
> > > apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.5.3-beta/
> > >
> > >
> > > The tag to be voted upon:
> > > *https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/tree/release-3.5.3-rc0
> > > *
> > >
> > > ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > > http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
> > >
> > > Should we release this candidate?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cheers
> > > Michael.
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Michael.
>

[ANNOUNCE] Apache ZooKeeper 3.4.10

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

The Apache ZooKeeper team is proud to announce Apache ZooKeeper version
3.4.10

ZooKeeper is a high-performance coordination service for distributed
applications. It exposes common services - such as naming,
configuration management, synchronization, and group services - in a
simple interface so you don't have to write them from scratch. You can
use it off-the-shelf to implement consensus, group management, leader
election, and presence protocols. And you can build on it for your
own, specific needs.

For ZooKeeper release details and downloads, visit:
http://zookeeper.apache.org/releases.html

ZooKeeper 3.4.10 Release Notes are at:
http://zookeeper.apache.org/doc/r3.4.10/releasenotes.html

We would like to thank the contributors that made the release possible.

Regards,

The ZooKeeper Team

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.10 candidate 1

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

With 3  +1 binding votes (including mine), and no -1, the vote for
candidate 1 passes. I'll work on publishing the release to the web site.

Here are the vote results,

Binding votes +1s:
 +3 from PMC members (Patrick Hunt, Flavio Junqueira, Rakesh
Radhakrishnan)

Non-binding votes +1s:
 +3 (Abraham Fine, Michael Han, Mohammad Arshad)

No -1s.

Thank you all for checking the release.

Rakesh

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> +1 from me as well
>
> Checked tests/packages/signatures.
>
> Regards,
> Rakesh
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Mohammad Arshad <
> arshad.mohamma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1
>> Run all tests on Ubuntu 15.10 on java 6.
>> Built tar ball on Ubuntu and Windows.
>> Verified basic features, create znode,delete znode, get data, set data,
>> get
>> acl, set acl etc.
>> Verified 4lw commands.
>> Verified CLI commands
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 3:53 AM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:
>>
>> > +1, ran tests, checked signature and digests, checked license and
>> notice,
>> > ran some smoke tests locally.
>> >
>> > -Flavio
>> >
>> > > On 28 Mar 2017, at 22:44, Michael Han  wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Yes, I forgot to mention that I did some backward compatible
>> verification
>> > > as well. I was using 3.4.10 client to connect to a 3.5.3 ensemble and
>> it
>> > > works as expected.
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Patrick Hunt 
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> fwiw I also tried running a 3 and 23 node cluster and it worked fine.
>> > 3.4.9
>> > >> client accessing 3.4.10 rc1 ensemble worked fine as well.
>> > >>
>> > >> Patrick
>> > >>
>> > >> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Patrick Hunt 
>> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> +1 - xsum/sig verified, RAT ran clean, was able to build and run the
>> > >> tests
>> > >>> successfully (mac).
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Patrick
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 5:40 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
>> > >> rake...@apache.org>
>> > >>> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> This is the second release candidate for 3.4.10. This candidate
>> fixed
>> > >> the
>> > >>>> MiniKDC authentication test case failures reported in the previous
>> > >>>> candidate.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> This is a bug fix release candidate for 3.4.10. It fixes 43 issues,
>> > >>>> including
>> > >>>> security feature QuorumPeer mutual authentication via SASL and
>> other
>> > >>>> potential bugs.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> The full release notes are available at:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
>> > >>>> ctId=12310801&version=12338036
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> *** Please download, test and vote by March 29th 2017, 23:59 UTC+0.
>> > ***
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Source files:
>> > >>>> http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.10-candidate-1/
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Maven staging repo:
>> > >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apa
>> > >>>> che/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.10/
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon:
>> release-3.4.10-rc1
>> > >>>> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/tree/release-3.4.10-rc1
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the
>> release:
>> > >>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Should we release this candidate?
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Rakesh
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Cheers
>> > > Michael.
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.10 candidate 1

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

+1 from me as well

Checked tests/packages/signatures.

Regards,
Rakesh

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Mohammad Arshad <
arshad.mohamma...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
> Run all tests on Ubuntu 15.10 on java 6.
> Built tar ball on Ubuntu and Windows.
> Verified basic features, create znode,delete znode, get data, set data, get
> acl, set acl etc.
> Verified 4lw commands.
> Verified CLI commands
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 3:53 AM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:
>
> > +1, ran tests, checked signature and digests, checked license and notice,
> > ran some smoke tests locally.
> >
> > -Flavio
> >
> > > On 28 Mar 2017, at 22:44, Michael Han  wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, I forgot to mention that I did some backward compatible
> verification
> > > as well. I was using 3.4.10 client to connect to a 3.5.3 ensemble and
> it
> > > works as expected.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Patrick Hunt 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> fwiw I also tried running a 3 and 23 node cluster and it worked fine.
> > 3.4.9
> > >> client accessing 3.4.10 rc1 ensemble worked fine as well.
> > >>
> > >> Patrick
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Patrick Hunt 
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> +1 - xsum/sig verified, RAT ran clean, was able to build and run the
> > >> tests
> > >>> successfully (mac).
> > >>>
> > >>> Patrick
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 5:40 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > >> rake...@apache.org>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> This is the second release candidate for 3.4.10. This candidate
> fixed
> > >> the
> > >>>> MiniKDC authentication test case failures reported in the previous
> > >>>> candidate.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This is a bug fix release candidate for 3.4.10. It fixes 43 issues,
> > >>>> including
> > >>>> security feature QuorumPeer mutual authentication via SASL and other
> > >>>> potential bugs.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The full release notes are available at:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
> > >>>> ctId=12310801&version=12338036
> > >>>>
> > >>>> *** Please download, test and vote by March 29th 2017, 23:59 UTC+0.
> > ***
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Source files:
> > >>>> http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.10-candidate-1/
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Maven staging repo:
> > >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apa
> > >>>> che/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.10/
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon:
> release-3.4.10-rc1
> > >>>> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/tree/release-3.4.10-rc1
> > >>>>
> > >>>> ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the
> release:
> > >>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Should we release this candidate?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Rakesh
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cheers
> > > Michael.
> >
> >
>

Vote on release 3.4.10 candidate 1

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thank you to the whole community on the effort to get a release candidate
out.

Everyone, please take this opportunity to test and vote on the release
candidate by March 29th 2017, 23:59 UTC+0. It would be really helpful if
multiple folks test with their systems to make sure that the RC is good.

Thanks,
Rakesh

-- Forwarded message --
From: Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
Date: Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 6:10 PM
Subject: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.10 candidate 1
To: DevZooKeeper 


This is the second release candidate for 3.4.10. This candidate fixed the
MiniKDC authentication test case failures reported in the previous
candidate.

This is a bug fix release candidate for 3.4.10. It fixes 43 issues,
including
security feature QuorumPeer mutual authentication via SASL and other
potential bugs.

The full release notes are available at:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
projectId=12310801&version=12338036

*** Please download, test and vote by March 29th 2017, 23:59 UTC+0. ***

Source files:
http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.10-candidate-1/

Maven staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/
apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.10/

The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: release-3.4.10-rc1
https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/tree/release-3.4.10-rc1

ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS

Should we release this candidate?


Rakesh

Re: [VOTE] Make 3.5.3 the first beta release.

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

+1


Rakesh

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 10:41 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <
jor...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:

> +1 non binding
>
> 
> Jordan Zimmerman
>
> > On Mar 23, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Michael Han  wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > As previously discussed on dev list [1] and JIRA [2], I propose we make
> the
> > upcoming 3.5.3 release the first beta release and drops the alpha tag.
> >
> > Please vote by *March 27th 2017, 23:59 UTC+0*. If no objections, I'll
> > commit the patch for [2] and proceed with release process next week after
> > the vote cycle ends.
> >
> > [1] 3.5.3: alpha or beta?
> >  201703.mbox/%3CCA%2Bi0x1JZacVMQGd_Jb34jSaw7p_nhWpcx9uzHwCwPPF%2BPPrf3g%
> 40mail.gmail.com%3E>
> > [2] ZOOKEEPER-2734  >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers
> > Michael.
>

[VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.10 candidate 1

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

This is the second release candidate for 3.4.10. This candidate fixed the
MiniKDC authentication test case failures reported in the previous
candidate.

This is a bug fix release candidate for 3.4.10. It fixes 43 issues,
including
security feature QuorumPeer mutual authentication via SASL and other
potential bugs.

The full release notes are available at:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310801&version=12338036

*** Please download, test and vote by March 29th 2017, 23:59 UTC+0. ***

Source files:
http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.10-candidate-1/

Maven staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.10/

The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: release-3.4.10-rc1
https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/tree/release-3.4.10-rc1

ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS

Should we release this candidate?


Rakesh

Re: Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.10 candidate 0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks a lot Pat for the feedback. I will prepare another release
candidate, today(IST).


Thanks,
Rakesh

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> FYI I just tested the latest branch 3.4 which includes the fix for 2712 and
> the tests all passed. Kudos!
>
> Patrick
>
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 9:11 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
> > Thank you Pat and Michael for voting and comments. We are *not* releasing
> > this candidate.
> >
> > Need to fix MiniKdc test failures.
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2712
> >
> > I'll create another candidate once this is fixed.
> >
> >
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 12:08 AM, Michael Han  wrote:
> >
> > > I am -1 on this one as well.
> > >
> > > I think we have had bad build
> > > <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper_branch34_jdk7/> for
> branch-3.4
> > > for
> > > a while.
> > > These tests consistently fail after build 1423:
> > >
> > >
> > >-
> > >org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.auth.QuorumKerberosHostB
> > > asedAuthTest.testValidCredentials
> > ><https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper_branch34_jdk7/1434
> > > /testReport/junit/org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.auth/Q
> > > uorumKerberosHostBasedAuthTest/testValidCredentials/>
> > >-
> > >org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.auth.QuorumKerberosHostB
> > > asedAuthTest.testConnectBadServer
> > ><https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper_branch34_jdk7/1434
> > > /testReport/junit/org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.auth/Q
> > > uorumKerberosHostBasedAuthTest/testConnectBadServer/>
> > >-
> > >org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.auth.QuorumKerberosAuthT
> > > est.testValidCredentials
> > ><https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper_branch34_jdk7/1434
> > > /testReport/junit/org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.auth/Q
> > > uorumKerberosAuthTest/testValidCredentials/>
> > >
> > >
> > > A brief look up indicates commit b26eaf3492a43821f648d8a8f87d8a
> > c3488f1cef
> > > <https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/commit/b26eaf3492a43821
> > > f648d8a8f87d8ac3488f1cef>
> > > might be the culprit.
> > > I think these tests need to be green before we can cut another RC
> build.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> > >
> > > > -1 - I'm seeing this test fail consistently on my Mac (the other
> tests
> > > all
> > > > seem to be passing on the java side)
> > > >
> > > > Lots of the "server not up" messages followed by:
> > > >
> > > > 2017-03-08 08:54:58,507 [myid:] - INFO  [Thread-1:FourLetterWordMain@
> > 62]
> > > -
> > > > connecting to 127.0.0.1 11224
> > > > 2017-03-08 08:54:58,508 [myid:] - INFO  [Thread-1:ClientBase@245] -
> > > server
> > > > 127.0.0.1:11224 not up java.net.ConnectException: Connection refused
> > > > (Connection refused)
> > > > 2017-03-08 08:54:58,508 [myid:] - INFO
> > > >  [Thread-1:JUnit4ZKTestRunner$LoggedInvokeMethod@74] - TEST METHOD
> > > FAILED
> > > > testValidCredentials
> > > > java.lang.AssertionError: waiting for server 1 being up
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:09 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > rake...@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > This is a bug fix release candidate for 3.4.10. It fixes 39 issues,
> > > > > including
> > > > > security feature QuorumPeer mutual authentication via SASL and
> other
> > > > > potential bugs.
> > > > >
> > > > > The full release notes are available at:
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> > > > > projectId=12310801&version=12338036
> > > > >
> > > > > *** Please download, test and vote by March 14th 2017, 23:59 UTC+0.
> > ***
> > > > >
> > > > > Source files:
> > > > > http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.10-candidate-0/
> > > > >
> > > > > Maven staging repo:
> > > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/
> > > > > apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.10/
> > > > >
> > > > > The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon:
> release-3.4.10-rc0
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/tree/release-3.4.10-rc0
> > > > >
> > > > > ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the
> release:
> > > > > http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
> > > > >
> > > > > Should we release this candidate?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Rakesh
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cheers
> > > Michael.
> > >
> >
>

Re: Patch or PR?

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi Jordan,

It is encouraged to create PR rather than patches. I could see, committers
are preferring PR.

Reference: Hope you have referred "Pull requests via github" section in
below link to know the PR approach,
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToContribute

Rakesh

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 7:58 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
jor...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:

> Hi Folks,
>
> Are we still doing patches for issues or can I just do a Github PR now?
>
> -Jordan
>

Re: ZooKeeper Build failure - Unsupported major.minor version 52.0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

https://builds.apache.org/view/All/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/3308/console
https://builds.apache.org/view/All/job/ZooKeeper_branch34/1867/console
https://builds.apache.org/view/All/job/ZooKeeper_branch34_openjdk7/1424/console
https://builds.apache.org/view/All/job/ZooKeeper_branch35_jdk7/881/console


All the above listed builds are failing with "Unsupported major.minor
version 52.0" error.

[ZooKeeper_branch35_jdk7] $ /home/jenkins/tools/ant/latest/bin/ant
-Dtest.output=yes -Dtest.junit.threads=8 -Dtest.junit.output.format=xml
-Djavac.target=1.7 clean test-core-java
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsupportedClassVersionError:
org/apache/tools/ant/launch/Launcher : Unsupported major.minor version 52.0
at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass1(Native Method)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass(ClassLoader.java:800)


As per the jira https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13526
discussion, it needs to change the build configuration. Could you please
help to do the necessary conf changes. Thanks!


Rakesh


On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> Hi Rakesh, I would like to help, but I don't think I can. I think Flavio
> has to do the following:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/Jenkins#Jenkins-
> HowdoIgetanaccount
>
> Patrick
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 8:31 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
> > Yes, I've tried visiting the page. But getting access denied exception.
> > Could you please give permission to the user "rakeshr". Anyway, Gavin has
> > reconfigured it for now and triggered build.
> >
> > "rakeshr is missing the Job/ExtendedRead permission"
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> >
> > > Rakesh, we have two types of builds, qa bot and "regular".
> > >
> > > qa bot:
> > >
> > > https://builds.apache.org/view/S-Z/view/ZooKeeper/job/
> > > ZooKeeper-trunk/configure
> > >
> > > search for "ant_home" on this page (it's in a bash script down on the
> > page)
> > > - we'll need to get the path to the old version from INFRA. Although it
> > > looks like we can inject some environment variables now? Perhaps that's
> > the
> > > right way to do it instead.
> > >
> > > regular:
> > >
> > > https://builds.apache.org/view/S-Z/view/ZooKeeper/job/
> > > ZooKeeper-trunk-openjdk7/configure
> > >
> > > look in the "build" section for the dropdown
> > >
> > > Do you want to give this a try? Now's the best time to learn. ;-)
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > rake...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes,  logged in. But didn't see the drop down options.
> > > >
> > > > Rakesh
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Patrick Hunt 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Rakesh can you login to jenkins?
> > > > >
> > > > > Patrick
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:29 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > > > rake...@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I've created an https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/INFRA-13526
> > > jira
> > > > > to
> > > > > > understand more about the failure. From the discussion it looks
> > like,
> > > > Ant
> > > > > > (latest) link was changed a few days ago to point to new Ant
> > release
> > > > > 1.10.1
> > > > > > and this version of ant requires Java8.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So the possible fix is, either change the build to use Ant
> release
> > > > 1.10.1
> > > > > > or change to use Ant 1.9.9 or less. Since ZK supports Java
> release
> > > 1.7
> > > > or
> > > > > > greater, I think changing to use Ant 1.9.9 or less which supports
> > > Java7
> > > > > is
> > > > > > preferable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Could someone familiar with the Jenkins build explains me the way
> > to
> > > do
> > > > > > this Ant version changes. Thanks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Rakesh
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Disabling snapshots in ZooKeeper

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi Aishwarya,

>Is there a way to disable snapshots
Its interesting, just curious to know the thought process behind disabling
snapshot feature. Thanks!


Rakesh



On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Michael Han  wrote:

> >> Is there a way to disable snapshots when the Zookeeper process restarts?
> Snapshot is a mandatory feature so there is no configuration option to
> disable it afaik.
>
> >>  is it safe to just comment zk.takeSnapshot()
> This should work in theory, if there is no snapshot ZK will rely on
> transaction log file for recovery. But I never tried it though.
>
> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Aishwarya Ganesan 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Is there a way to disable snapshots when the Zookeeper process restarts?
> > Setting snapCount to a large value doesn't help as Zookeeper takes
> > a snapshot on startup.
> >
> > In order to achieve this, is it safe to just comment zk.takeSnapshot() in
> > the code?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Aishwarya
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Michael.
>

Re: Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.10 candidate 0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thank you Pat and Michael for voting and comments. We are *not* releasing
this candidate.

Need to fix MiniKdc test failures.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2712

I'll create another candidate once this is fixed.


Rakesh

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 12:08 AM, Michael Han  wrote:

> I am -1 on this one as well.
>
> I think we have had bad build
> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper_branch34_jdk7/> for branch-3.4
> for
> a while.
> These tests consistently fail after build 1423:
>
>
>-
>org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.auth.QuorumKerberosHostB
> asedAuthTest.testValidCredentials
><https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper_branch34_jdk7/1434
> /testReport/junit/org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.auth/Q
> uorumKerberosHostBasedAuthTest/testValidCredentials/>
>-
>org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.auth.QuorumKerberosHostB
> asedAuthTest.testConnectBadServer
><https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper_branch34_jdk7/1434
> /testReport/junit/org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.auth/Q
> uorumKerberosHostBasedAuthTest/testConnectBadServer/>
>-
>org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.auth.QuorumKerberosAuthT
> est.testValidCredentials
><https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper_branch34_jdk7/1434
> /testReport/junit/org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.auth/Q
> uorumKerberosAuthTest/testValidCredentials/>
>
>
> A brief look up indicates commit b26eaf3492a43821f648d8a8f87d8ac3488f1cef
> <https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/commit/b26eaf3492a43821
> f648d8a8f87d8ac3488f1cef>
> might be the culprit.
> I think these tests need to be green before we can cut another RC build.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>
> > -1 - I'm seeing this test fail consistently on my Mac (the other tests
> all
> > seem to be passing on the java side)
> >
> > Lots of the "server not up" messages followed by:
> >
> > 2017-03-08 08:54:58,507 [myid:] - INFO  [Thread-1:FourLetterWordMain@62]
> -
> > connecting to 127.0.0.1 11224
> > 2017-03-08 08:54:58,508 [myid:] - INFO  [Thread-1:ClientBase@245] -
> server
> > 127.0.0.1:11224 not up java.net.ConnectException: Connection refused
> > (Connection refused)
> > 2017-03-08 08:54:58,508 [myid:] - INFO
> >  [Thread-1:JUnit4ZKTestRunner$LoggedInvokeMethod@74] - TEST METHOD
> FAILED
> > testValidCredentials
> > java.lang.AssertionError: waiting for server 1 being up
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:09 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > This is a bug fix release candidate for 3.4.10. It fixes 39 issues,
> > > including
> > > security feature QuorumPeer mutual authentication via SASL and other
> > > potential bugs.
> > >
> > > The full release notes are available at:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> > > projectId=12310801&version=12338036
> > >
> > > *** Please download, test and vote by March 14th 2017, 23:59 UTC+0. ***
> > >
> > > Source files:
> > > http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.10-candidate-0/
> > >
> > > Maven staging repo:
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/
> > > apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.10/
> > >
> > > The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: release-3.4.10-rc0
> > > https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/tree/release-3.4.10-rc0
> > >
> > > ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > > http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
> > >
> > > Should we release this candidate?
> > >
> > >
> > > Rakesh
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Michael.
>

Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.10 candidate 0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

This is a bug fix release candidate for 3.4.10. It fixes 39 issues,
including
security feature QuorumPeer mutual authentication via SASL and other
potential bugs.

The full release notes are available at:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310801&version=12338036

*** Please download, test and vote by March 14th 2017, 23:59 UTC+0. ***

Source files:
http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.10-candidate-0/

Maven staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.10/

The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: release-3.4.10-rc0
https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/tree/release-3.4.10-rc0

ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS

Should we release this candidate?


Rakesh

Re: Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.10 candidate 0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Sorry, kindly ignore this mail as the links are not proper.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.10. It fixes 39 issues,
> including security feature
> QuorumPeer mutual authentication via SASL and other potential bugs.
>
> The full release notes are available at:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> projectId=12310801&version=12338036
>
> *** Please download, test and vote by March 14th 2017, 23:59 UTC+0. ***
>
> Source files:
> http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.10-candidate-0/
> <http://people.apache.org/~fpj/zookeeper-3.4.6-candidate-0/>
>
> Maven staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/
> apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.10/
> <https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.6/>
>
> The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: release-3.4.10-rc0
> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/tree/release-3.4.10-rc0
>
> ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
>
> Should we release this candidate?
>
>
> Rakesh
>

Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.10 candidate 0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.10. It fixes 39 issues,
including security feature
QuorumPeer mutual authentication via SASL and other potential bugs.

The full release notes are available at:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310801&version=12338036

*** Please download, test and vote by March 14th 2017, 23:59 UTC+0. ***

Source files:
http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.10-candidate-0/


Maven staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.10/


The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: release-3.4.10-rc0
https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/tree/release-3.4.10-rc0

ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS

Should we release this candidate?


Rakesh

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thank you everyone for the great support!

ZOOKEEPER-2693 has been merged. I hope we are good to go and I will prepare
release candidate.

Regards,
Rakesh

On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> Thank you Michael for the useful comments. I've updated the wiki page,
> kindly review it again.
>
>
> Rakesh
>
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 4:17 AM, Michael Han  wrote:
>
>> Hi Rakesh,
>>
>> My super late feedback for
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToR
>> elease+using+git
>> with two minor comments:
>>
>> * In Branching section, it said:
>> # create new branch-X.Y from master branch
>> git checkout -b branch-X.Y master
>>
>> # commit and push the changes to remote repo
>> git commit -m "Preparing for release X.Y.Z"
>> git push  branch-X.Y
>>
>> I believe the "git commit" step is redundant, because all we do here is to
>> create a branch from master, and there is nothing to commit (no staged
>> files.). We could just remove the commit step.
>>
>> * In Updating release branch section, 2 - it mentions merge patch. I think
>> the recommended approach (or best practice?) which Edward also pointed out
>> earlier is to use 'git cherry-pick', so we can have a consistent revision
>> history between branches.
>>
>> Thanks for putting up the wiki page!
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi PMCs/committers,
>> >
>> > It would be great to see feedback on the updated branching release
>> > procedure mentioned in the cwiki page. How about publishing an initial
>> > release candidate by following the new procedure, probably you all can
>> > verify the RC-0 and do voting?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Rakesh
>> >
>> > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
>> rake...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi All,
>> > >
>> > > I've tried an attempt by converting all the applicable svn commands to
>> > git
>> > > commands in "HowToRelease using git" cwiki page. Welcome comments,
>> > thanks!
>> > >
>> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/
>> > > HowToRelease+using+git
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Rakesh
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:54 PM, Edward Ribeiro <
>> > edward.ribe...@gmail.com
>> > > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> ​​
>> > >> Hi Rakesh,
>> > >>
>> > >> I have comment on ZK-2622.
>> > >>
>> > >> Took a look at the 'HowToRelease' using git page and have one minor
>> > >> comment:
>> > >>
>> > >> 2. "If not already done, merge desired patches from master into the
>> > branch
>> > >> and commit these changes.
>> > >> (...)
>> > >> "
>> > >>
>> > >> AFAIK merging from master to branch-3.4 would bring all those
>> changes in
>> > >> master and try to apply them to branch-3.4. This usuallys leads to
>> lots
>> > of
>> > >> conflicts and is not desirable. What I usually see in Cassandra
>> commit
>> > >> history is merging upwards: 2.2 -> 3.0 -> 3.1 -> master so that
>> changes
>> > in
>> > >> previous versions are
>> > >> ​ported​ to
>> > >>  further releases
>> > >> ​: https://github.com/apache/cassandra/commits/trunk​
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> So
>> > >> ​,​
>> > >> I would rephrase the "merge desired patches from master into branch
>> and
>> > >> commit those changes" to "cherry-pick desired commits from master
>> into
>> > >> branch". The act of merging/rebasing/cherry-picking auto commit the
>> > >> changes
>> > >> on the target branch. If you want to avoid doing that then have to
>> > resort
>> > >> to things like this:
>> > >> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8640887/git-merge-
>> > without-auto-commit
>> > >>
>> > >> BUT I AM NOT GIT EXPERT, so I feel free to ignore this suggestion.
>> > >> ​Further info​
>> > >>  here:
>> > >> http://stackoverflow.com

Re: Partial crash bug described in Redundancy Does Not Imply Fault Tolerance: Analysis of Distributed Storage Reactions to Single Errors and Corruptions (FAST17)

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks a lot Andrew Purtell for pointing out this.

I could see, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2247 jira is
talking about similar case. Could you please go through this jira and let
me know your comments.

It seems they have used ZooKeeper (v3.4.8) for preparing the report. This
bug is fixed and available only in the latest stable version 3.4.9.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell 
wrote:

> Is there a JIRA open for the partial crash bug described in "Redundancy
> Does Not Imply Fault Tolerance: Analysis of Distributed Storage Reactions
> to Single Errors and Corruptions" Aishwarya Ganesan, Ramnatthan Alagappan,
> Andrea C. Arpaci-Dusseau, and Remzi H. Arpaci-Dusseau, University of
> Wisconsin—Madison. 15th USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies
> (FAST ’17)?
>
> From
> https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/fast17/fast17-ganesan.pdf
>
>
> "Unfortunately, ZooKeeper does not recover from write errors to the
> transaction head and log tail. On write errors during log initialization,
> the error handling code tries to gracefully shutdown the node but kills
> only the transaction processing threads; the quorum thread remains alive
> (partial crash). Consequently, other nodes believe that the leader is
> healthy and do not elect a new leader. However, since the leader has
> partially crashed, it cannot propose any transactions, leading to an
> indefinite write unavailability."
>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew Purtell
> apurt...@salesforce.com
> apurt...@apache.org
>

Re: New to Apache Zookeeper

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi,

Umbrella jira to fix flaky test cases:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2135.
Probably, you could participate in code reviews(jira pull requests/patches
etc.). This will also help you to learn the system.
https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pulls

I hope you have visited
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToContribute wiki
page. If not please read this, which is a good resource for new folks
interested in participating.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 12:49 AM, Tharindu Kumara  wrote:

> Hi Yan,
>
> Thank you so much for your comments. I will start from there. I would like
> to know, whether there are any tickets for this issue?
>
> Thanks
>
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 12:40 AM, Yan Fitterer  wrote:
>
> > A lovely thing to do would be to work on the tests.
> >
> > In my experience, the test suite is unreliable (it fails about 2/3 or the
> > time for me), so there are probably timing/concurrency issues that could
> be
> > worked on.
> >
> > As a starter, run the test suite, see what fails for you (to make sure
> > you’re not picking up recent breakage, you could first confirm which
> tests
> > fail against a released version, and find one that still fails against
> > head), and see if you can make them pass.
> >
> > Just my 2c, there are plenty of other worthy contenders for contribution,
> > I’m sure.
> >
> >
> > > On Feb 25, 2017, at 01:16, Tharindu Kumara 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > ​Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm Tharindu Kumara, and currently I am working as a Software Engineer
> > in a
> > > well known company. I'm really interested in helping out and
> contributing
> > > to Apache Zookeeper Project . I've always loved to contribute to the
> open
> > > source community and Apache Zookeeper seems like a brilliant place for
> me
> > > to start.
> > >
> > >
> > > I good at C/C++, Java, Python and JavaScript and I have more than 5
> years
> > > of experience in using these languages. And also I have a good
> knowledge
> > on
> > > Distributed Computing principals. Apart from that I have a good
> > > knowledge about libraries like boost and build tools like ant, maven
> and
> > > cmake.
> > >
> > >
> > > During recent months, I read a lot about zookeeper. And I played with
> it
> > to
> > > get hand on experience.
> > > I also played with exhibitor and apache curator as well.
> > >
> > >
> > > It would be very kind of you If you could guide me along and assign me
> a
> > > bug on which I could work and begin contributing to the open source
> > > community .
> > >
> > >
> > > Thank You​
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > LinkedIn: lk.linkedin.com/in/  > tharindukumara>
> > > tharindukumara 
> > > StackOverflow: http://stackoverflow.com/users/3312620/tharindu-kumara
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Tharindu Kumara
> BSc Undergraduate
> University of Colombo School of Computing (UCSC).
> Student Member of IEEE
>
> LinkedIn: lk.linkedin.com/in/ 
> tharindukumara 
> GitHub: https://github.com/tharindukumara
> StackOverflow: http://stackoverflow.com/users/3312620/tharindu-kumara
>

Re: ZooKeeper Build failure - Unsupported major.minor version 52.0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

OK, thanks!

Rakesh

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> Hi Rakesh, I would like to help, but I don't think I can. I think Flavio
> has to do the following:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/Jenkins#Jenkins-
> HowdoIgetanaccount
>
> Patrick
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 8:31 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
> > Yes, I've tried visiting the page. But getting access denied exception.
> > Could you please give permission to the user "rakeshr". Anyway, Gavin has
> > reconfigured it for now and triggered build.
> >
> > "rakeshr is missing the Job/ExtendedRead permission"
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> >
> > > Rakesh, we have two types of builds, qa bot and "regular".
> > >
> > > qa bot:
> > >
> > > https://builds.apache.org/view/S-Z/view/ZooKeeper/job/
> > > ZooKeeper-trunk/configure
> > >
> > > search for "ant_home" on this page (it's in a bash script down on the
> > page)
> > > - we'll need to get the path to the old version from INFRA. Although it
> > > looks like we can inject some environment variables now? Perhaps that's
> > the
> > > right way to do it instead.
> > >
> > > regular:
> > >
> > > https://builds.apache.org/view/S-Z/view/ZooKeeper/job/
> > > ZooKeeper-trunk-openjdk7/configure
> > >
> > > look in the "build" section for the dropdown
> > >
> > > Do you want to give this a try? Now's the best time to learn. ;-)
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > rake...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes,  logged in. But didn't see the drop down options.
> > > >
> > > > Rakesh
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Patrick Hunt 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Rakesh can you login to jenkins?
> > > > >
> > > > > Patrick
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:29 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > > > rake...@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I've created an https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/INFRA-13526
> > > jira
> > > > > to
> > > > > > understand more about the failure. From the discussion it looks
> > like,
> > > > Ant
> > > > > > (latest) link was changed a few days ago to point to new Ant
> > release
> > > > > 1.10.1
> > > > > > and this version of ant requires Java8.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So the possible fix is, either change the build to use Ant
> release
> > > > 1.10.1
> > > > > > or change to use Ant 1.9.9 or less. Since ZK supports Java
> release
> > > 1.7
> > > > or
> > > > > > greater, I think changing to use Ant 1.9.9 or less which supports
> > > Java7
> > > > > is
> > > > > > preferable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Could someone familiar with the Jenkins build explains me the way
> > to
> > > do
> > > > > > this Ant version changes. Thanks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Rakesh
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: ZooKeeper Build failure - Unsupported major.minor version 52.0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Yes, I've tried visiting the page. But getting access denied exception.
Could you please give permission to the user "rakeshr". Anyway, Gavin has
reconfigured it for now and triggered build.

"rakeshr is missing the Job/ExtendedRead permission"

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> Rakesh, we have two types of builds, qa bot and "regular".
>
> qa bot:
>
> https://builds.apache.org/view/S-Z/view/ZooKeeper/job/
> ZooKeeper-trunk/configure
>
> search for "ant_home" on this page (it's in a bash script down on the page)
> - we'll need to get the path to the old version from INFRA. Although it
> looks like we can inject some environment variables now? Perhaps that's the
> right way to do it instead.
>
> regular:
>
> https://builds.apache.org/view/S-Z/view/ZooKeeper/job/
> ZooKeeper-trunk-openjdk7/configure
>
> look in the "build" section for the dropdown
>
> Do you want to give this a try? Now's the best time to learn. ;-)
>
> Patrick
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
> > Yes,  logged in. But didn't see the drop down options.
> >
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> >
> > > Rakesh can you login to jenkins?
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:29 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > rake...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > I've created an https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13526
> jira
> > > to
> > > > understand more about the failure. From the discussion it looks like,
> > Ant
> > > > (latest) link was changed a few days ago to point to new Ant release
> > > 1.10.1
> > > > and this version of ant requires Java8.
> > > >
> > > > So the possible fix is, either change the build to use Ant release
> > 1.10.1
> > > > or change to use Ant 1.9.9 or less. Since ZK supports Java release
> 1.7
> > or
> > > > greater, I think changing to use Ant 1.9.9 or less which supports
> Java7
> > > is
> > > > preferable.
> > > >
> > > > Could someone familiar with the Jenkins build explains me the way to
> do
> > > > this Ant version changes. Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Rakesh
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: ZooKeeper Build failure - Unsupported major.minor version 52.0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Yes,  logged in. But didn't see the drop down options.

Rakesh

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> Rakesh can you login to jenkins?
>
> Patrick
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:29 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I've created an https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13526 jira
> to
> > understand more about the failure. From the discussion it looks like, Ant
> > (latest) link was changed a few days ago to point to new Ant release
> 1.10.1
> > and this version of ant requires Java8.
> >
> > So the possible fix is, either change the build to use Ant release 1.10.1
> > or change to use Ant 1.9.9 or less. Since ZK supports Java release 1.7 or
> > greater, I think changing to use Ant 1.9.9 or less which supports Java7
> is
> > preferable.
> >
> > Could someone familiar with the Jenkins build explains me the way to do
> > this Ant version changes. Thanks!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rakesh
> >
>

ZooKeeper Build failure - Unsupported major.minor version 52.0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi All,

I've created an https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13526 jira to
understand more about the failure. From the discussion it looks like, Ant
(latest) link was changed a few days ago to point to new Ant release 1.10.1
and this version of ant requires Java8.

So the possible fix is, either change the build to use Ant release 1.10.1
or change to use Ant 1.9.9 or less. Since ZK supports Java release 1.7 or
greater, I think changing to use Ant 1.9.9 or less which supports Java7 is
preferable.

Could someone familiar with the Jenkins build explains me the way to do
this Ant version changes. Thanks!

Thanks,
Rakesh

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thank you Michael for the useful comments. I've updated the wiki page,
kindly review it again.


Rakesh

On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 4:17 AM, Michael Han  wrote:

> Hi Rakesh,
>
> My super late feedback for
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/
> HowToRelease+using+git
> with two minor comments:
>
> * In Branching section, it said:
> # create new branch-X.Y from master branch
> git checkout -b branch-X.Y master
>
> # commit and push the changes to remote repo
> git commit -m "Preparing for release X.Y.Z"
> git push  branch-X.Y
>
> I believe the "git commit" step is redundant, because all we do here is to
> create a branch from master, and there is nothing to commit (no staged
> files.). We could just remove the commit step.
>
> * In Updating release branch section, 2 - it mentions merge patch. I think
> the recommended approach (or best practice?) which Edward also pointed out
> earlier is to use 'git cherry-pick', so we can have a consistent revision
> history between branches.
>
> Thanks for putting up the wiki page!
>
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi PMCs/committers,
> >
> > It would be great to see feedback on the updated branching release
> > procedure mentioned in the cwiki page. How about publishing an initial
> > release candidate by following the new procedure, probably you all can
> > verify the RC-0 and do voting?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I've tried an attempt by converting all the applicable svn commands to
> > git
> > > commands in "HowToRelease using git" cwiki page. Welcome comments,
> > thanks!
> > >
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/
> > > HowToRelease+using+git
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Rakesh
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:54 PM, Edward Ribeiro <
> > edward.ribe...@gmail.com
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> ​​
> > >> Hi Rakesh,
> > >>
> > >> I have comment on ZK-2622.
> > >>
> > >> Took a look at the 'HowToRelease' using git page and have one minor
> > >> comment:
> > >>
> > >> 2. "If not already done, merge desired patches from master into the
> > branch
> > >> and commit these changes.
> > >> (...)
> > >> "
> > >>
> > >> AFAIK merging from master to branch-3.4 would bring all those changes
> in
> > >> master and try to apply them to branch-3.4. This usuallys leads to
> lots
> > of
> > >> conflicts and is not desirable. What I usually see in Cassandra commit
> > >> history is merging upwards: 2.2 -> 3.0 -> 3.1 -> master so that
> changes
> > in
> > >> previous versions are
> > >> ​ported​ to
> > >>  further releases
> > >> ​: https://github.com/apache/cassandra/commits/trunk​
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> So
> > >> ​,​
> > >> I would rephrase the "merge desired patches from master into branch
> and
> > >> commit those changes" to "cherry-pick desired commits from master into
> > >> branch". The act of merging/rebasing/cherry-picking auto commit the
> > >> changes
> > >> on the target branch. If you want to avoid doing that then have to
> > resort
> > >> to things like this:
> > >> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8640887/git-merge-
> > without-auto-commit
> > >>
> > >> BUT I AM NOT GIT EXPERT, so I feel free to ignore this suggestion.
> > >> ​Further info​
> > >>  here:
> > >> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1241720/git-cherry-pick-
> > >> vs-merge-workflow
> > >>
> > >> ​Best regards,
> > >> Eddie​
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > rake...@apache.org
> > >> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Thanks Edward for the interest. I hope you are watching
> 'HowToRelease'
> > >> > using git page discussion, which is still in progress. I'd like to
> > give
> > >> > some more time to the folks to push their interesting issues(I'd
> > prefer
> > >> > issues wi

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi PMCs/committers,

It would be great to see feedback on the updated branching release
procedure mentioned in the cwiki page. How about publishing an initial
release candidate by following the new procedure, probably you all can
verify the RC-0 and do voting?

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I've tried an attempt by converting all the applicable svn commands to git
> commands in "HowToRelease using git" cwiki page. Welcome comments, thanks!
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/
> HowToRelease+using+git
>
> Thanks,
> Rakesh
>
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:54 PM, Edward Ribeiro  > wrote:
>
>> ​​
>> Hi Rakesh,
>>
>> I have comment on ZK-2622.
>>
>> Took a look at the 'HowToRelease' using git page and have one minor
>> comment:
>>
>> 2. "If not already done, merge desired patches from master into the branch
>> and commit these changes.
>> (...)
>> "
>>
>> AFAIK merging from master to branch-3.4 would bring all those changes in
>> master and try to apply them to branch-3.4. This usuallys leads to lots of
>> conflicts and is not desirable. What I usually see in Cassandra commit
>> history is merging upwards: 2.2 -> 3.0 -> 3.1 -> master so that changes in
>> previous versions are
>> ​ported​ to
>>  further releases
>> ​: https://github.com/apache/cassandra/commits/trunk​
>>
>>
>> So
>> ​,​
>> I would rephrase the "merge desired patches from master into branch and
>> commit those changes" to "cherry-pick desired commits from master into
>> branch". The act of merging/rebasing/cherry-picking auto commit the
>> changes
>> on the target branch. If you want to avoid doing that then have to resort
>> to things like this:
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8640887/git-merge-without-auto-commit
>>
>> BUT I AM NOT GIT EXPERT, so I feel free to ignore this suggestion.
>> ​Further info​
>>  here:
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1241720/git-cherry-pick-
>> vs-merge-workflow
>>
>> ​Best regards,
>> Eddie​
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan > >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks Edward for the interest. I hope you are watching 'HowToRelease'
>> > using git page discussion, which is still in progress. I'd like to give
>> > some more time to the folks to push their interesting issues(I'd prefer
>> > issues with low risk) until the release procedure is finalized.
>> >
>> > I've marked ZOOKEEPER-2622's fix version to 3.4.10, appreciate your
>> > feedback on the attached pull request so that some of our committers
>> will
>> > help in pushing it upstream.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Rakesh
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Edward Ribeiro <
>> edward.ribe...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > Rakesh and Flavio, what do you think about merging ZOOKEEPER-2622 to
>> > > branch-3.4 and include it in 3.4.10 besides branch-3.5 and master?
>> > >
>> > > Edward
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:20 AM, Flavio Junqueira 
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Here are a few comments on the proposal of changes to the release
>> > > process:
>> > > >
>> > > > - It might be a better idea to preserve the HowToRelease document
>> for
>> > > > future reference, clone the document, and change the cloned
>> document to
>> > > > reflect the git commands rather than svn.
>> > > > - We still need to modify Step 2 to be git oriented, otherwise it
>> will
>> > > > look odd that we have svn there.
>> > > > - In Step 4, I thought that we had informally agreed to rely on the
>> git
>> > > > log rather than maintain the CHANGES.txt file. If we aren't all
>> onboard
>> > > > with the idea of stopping to use CHANGES.txt, then we need to
>> discuss
>> > > this
>> > > > separately.
>> > > > - Steps 5 and 6: I'm not sure why the steps to produce the release
>> > notes
>> > > > changes. We still resolve issues on jira which is pretty much the
>> > source
>> > > of
>> > > > data for the release notes.
>> > > > - Step 10: I personally don't like

Re: CHANGES.txt?

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi All,

I hope all are agreeing to remove CHANGE.txt file from ZK project
repository. I believe, ZOOKEEPER-2672 jira needs to be concluded(to avoid
confusions) before cutting 3.4.10 release. I'm planning to remove
CHANGE.txt file in 2 days time frame, 8 February 2017, 6:00 PM (PST), if
there is no objection. Thanks!

Thanks & Regards,
Rakesh

On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:06 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> +1 for removing the CHANGE.txt file.
>
> I agree to rely on source control (github) revision logs instead of
> CHANGE.txt moving forward.
>
> Note: Jira issue ZOOKEEPER-2672 will be used to remove this file.
>
> Thanks,
> Rakesh
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 3:59 AM, Michael Han  wrote:
>
>> See https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@zookeeper.apache.org/msg37108.html
>>
>> I think there was no decision explicitly made but looks like every one was
>> OK to head towards the direction of removing CHANGE.TXT.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:
>>
>> > Could anyone remind me of what we decided for CHANGES.txt? Are we
>> supposed
>> > to add resolved jiras to it or are we going to rely on the git log?
>> >
>> > I have committed ZK-761 to master without the change to CHANGES.txt, but
>> > then I noticed that some commits are going in with it, so I did it to
>> the
>> > 3.5 branch. I want to know if I need to make it consistent or not.
>> >
>> > -Flavio
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Michael.
>>
>
>

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi All,

I've tried an attempt by converting all the applicable svn commands to git
commands in "HowToRelease using git" cwiki page. Welcome comments, thanks!

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease+using+git

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:54 PM, Edward Ribeiro 
wrote:

> ​​
> Hi Rakesh,
>
> I have comment on ZK-2622.
>
> Took a look at the 'HowToRelease' using git page and have one minor
> comment:
>
> 2. "If not already done, merge desired patches from master into the branch
> and commit these changes.
> (...)
> "
>
> AFAIK merging from master to branch-3.4 would bring all those changes in
> master and try to apply them to branch-3.4. This usuallys leads to lots of
> conflicts and is not desirable. What I usually see in Cassandra commit
> history is merging upwards: 2.2 -> 3.0 -> 3.1 -> master so that changes in
> previous versions are
> ​ported​ to
>  further releases
> ​: https://github.com/apache/cassandra/commits/trunk​
>
>
> So
> ​,​
> I would rephrase the "merge desired patches from master into branch and
> commit those changes" to "cherry-pick desired commits from master into
> branch". The act of merging/rebasing/cherry-picking auto commit the
> changes
> on the target branch. If you want to avoid doing that then have to resort
> to things like this:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8640887/git-merge-without-auto-commit
>
> BUT I AM NOT GIT EXPERT, so I feel free to ignore this suggestion.
> ​Further info​
>  here:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1241720/git-cherry-
> pick-vs-merge-workflow
>
> ​Best regards,
> Eddie​
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Edward for the interest. I hope you are watching 'HowToRelease'
> > using git page discussion, which is still in progress. I'd like to give
> > some more time to the folks to push their interesting issues(I'd prefer
> > issues with low risk) until the release procedure is finalized.
> >
> > I've marked ZOOKEEPER-2622's fix version to 3.4.10, appreciate your
> > feedback on the attached pull request so that some of our committers will
> > help in pushing it upstream.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Edward Ribeiro <
> edward.ribe...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Rakesh and Flavio, what do you think about merging ZOOKEEPER-2622 to
> > > branch-3.4 and include it in 3.4.10 besides branch-3.5 and master?
> > >
> > > Edward
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:20 AM, Flavio Junqueira 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Here are a few comments on the proposal of changes to the release
> > > process:
> > > >
> > > > - It might be a better idea to preserve the HowToRelease document for
> > > > future reference, clone the document, and change the cloned document
> to
> > > > reflect the git commands rather than svn.
> > > > - We still need to modify Step 2 to be git oriented, otherwise it
> will
> > > > look odd that we have svn there.
> > > > - In Step 4, I thought that we had informally agreed to rely on the
> git
> > > > log rather than maintain the CHANGES.txt file. If we aren't all
> onboard
> > > > with the idea of stopping to use CHANGES.txt, then we need to discuss
> > > this
> > > > separately.
> > > > - Steps 5 and 6: I'm not sure why the steps to produce the release
> > notes
> > > > changes. We still resolve issues on jira which is pretty much the
> > source
> > > of
> > > > data for the release notes.
> > > > - Step 10: I personally don't like using "git commit -a" unless
> you're
> > > > pretty sure that it is what you want. A much safer approach is to run
> > > "git
> > > > status" and "git add" to the individual files/directories.
> > > > - Step 11: Why are we tagging with -s? Is that standard practice in
> > other
> > > > projects?
> > > >
> > > > -Flavio
> > > >
> > > > > On 26 Jan 2017, at 03:30, Rakesh Radhakrishnan  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Agreed, will try to resolve ZK-2184. I have included this to 3.4.10
> > > > > releasing. I could see few open review comments in the PR, probably
> > > will
&g

Re: CHANGES.txt?

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

+1 for removing the CHANGE.txt file.

I agree to rely on source control (github) revision logs instead of
CHANGE.txt moving forward.

Note: Jira issue ZOOKEEPER-2672 will be used to remove this file.

Thanks,
Rakesh


On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 3:59 AM, Michael Han  wrote:

> See https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@zookeeper.apache.org/msg37108.html
>
> I think there was no decision explicitly made but looks like every one was
> OK to head towards the direction of removing CHANGE.TXT.
>
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:
>
> > Could anyone remind me of what we decided for CHANGES.txt? Are we
> supposed
> > to add resolved jiras to it or are we going to rely on the git log?
> >
> > I have committed ZK-761 to master without the change to CHANGES.txt, but
> > then I noticed that some commits are going in with it, so I did it to the
> > 3.5 branch. I want to know if I need to make it consistent or not.
> >
> > -Flavio
>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Michael.
>

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks Edward for the interest. I hope you are watching 'HowToRelease'
using git page discussion, which is still in progress. I'd like to give
some more time to the folks to push their interesting issues(I'd prefer
issues with low risk) until the release procedure is finalized.

I've marked ZOOKEEPER-2622's fix version to 3.4.10, appreciate your
feedback on the attached pull request so that some of our committers will
help in pushing it upstream.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Edward Ribeiro 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Rakesh and Flavio, what do you think about merging ZOOKEEPER-2622 to
> branch-3.4 and include it in 3.4.10 besides branch-3.5 and master?
>
> Edward
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:20 AM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:
>
> > Here are a few comments on the proposal of changes to the release
> process:
> >
> > - It might be a better idea to preserve the HowToRelease document for
> > future reference, clone the document, and change the cloned document to
> > reflect the git commands rather than svn.
> > - We still need to modify Step 2 to be git oriented, otherwise it will
> > look odd that we have svn there.
> > - In Step 4, I thought that we had informally agreed to rely on the git
> > log rather than maintain the CHANGES.txt file. If we aren't all onboard
> > with the idea of stopping to use CHANGES.txt, then we need to discuss
> this
> > separately.
> > - Steps 5 and 6: I'm not sure why the steps to produce the release notes
> > changes. We still resolve issues on jira which is pretty much the source
> of
> > data for the release notes.
> > - Step 10: I personally don't like using "git commit -a" unless you're
> > pretty sure that it is what you want. A much safer approach is to run
> "git
> > status" and "git add" to the individual files/directories.
> > - Step 11: Why are we tagging with -s? Is that standard practice in other
> > projects?
> >
> > -Flavio
> >
> > > On 26 Jan 2017, at 03:30, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Agreed, will try to resolve ZK-2184. I have included this to 3.4.10
> > > releasing. I could see few open review comments in the PR, probably
> will
> > > push once this is concluded.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Rakesh
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Flavio Junqueira 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I'd like to have ZK-2184 in as well. I have seen many cases in which
> > >> applications are affected by that problem. If folks can help me push
> it
> > >> through, I'd appreciate.
> > >>
> > >> -Flavio
> > >>
> > >>> On 25 Jan 2017, at 17:01, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> I've reviewed ZOOKEEPER-2044 pull request and added few comments. I
> > hope
> > >>> this will be committed soon.
> > >>>
> > >>> I'm planning to keep the CHANGE.txt file for this release. But, not
> > >>> updating the commit history considering that git revision can be used
> > as
> > >> a
> > >>> reference. Please see my comment https://goo.gl/wu5V2M in
> > ZOOKEEPER-2672
> > >>> jira.
> > >>>
> > >>> Sometime back, I've filtered the issues which was marked for 3.4.10
> and
> > >>> moved out these to 3.4.11 release.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> Rakesh
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 5:41 AM, Michael Han 
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Hi Rakesh,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks for driving 3.4.10 release.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I've been looking at https://issues.apache.org/
> > >> jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2044
> > >>>> today I think this could be a good addition to 3.4.10 release - what
> > do
> > >> you
> > >>>> think? Should we get this in 3.4.10?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > >> rake...@apache.org>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Hi folks,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> ZOOKEEPER-2573 fix is agreed and will be resolved soon. After
> > >> committing
> > >>>>> this jira, I'm planning to s

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks Flavio. I've added few points, please go through and let me know
your feedback.

>>>>>- It might be a better idea to preserve the HowToRelease document for
future reference, clone the document, and change the cloned document to
reflect the git
>>>>>commands rather than svn.
Agreed. I've created a copy from the existing HowToRelase. New page link
is,
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease+using+git
I will try to convert all the applicable svn related repo commands to git
commands.

>>>> We still need to modify Step 2 to be git oriented, otherwise it will
look odd that we have svn there.
I've skipped this step earlier because this is not required for 3.4.10
releasing. Anyway, let me try my best to do the changes in
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease+using+git
page.

>>>> - In Step 4, I thought that we had informally agreed to rely on the
git log rather than maintain the CHANGES.txt file. If we aren't all onboard
with the idea of stopping to
>>>> use CHANGES.txt, then we need to discuss this separately.
How about using ZOOKEEPER-2672 jira to reach to a conclusion. I'm also +1
on removal, afaik there is no dependency. I'd like to give some more days
to the folks before deleting this file.

>>>>  Steps 5 and 6: I'm not sure why the steps to produce the release
notes changes.
>>>>  We still resolve issues on jira which is pretty much the source of
data for the release notes.
I remember, during 3.4.9 releasing, I had followed step-5 and successfully
prepared release note. I believe, we can continue following step-5. But, I
don't know the need of step-6 and am not aware about the background of this
step addition.

>>>> - Step 10: I personally don't like using "git commit -a" unless you're
pretty sure that it is what you want. A much safer approach is to run "git
status" and "git add" to the
>>>> individual files/directories.
Agreed. I will change it.

>>>>> - Step 11: Why are we tagging with -s? Is that standard practice in
other projects?
Its a signed tag. I've followed *Hadoop*'s way https://wiki.apache.org/
hadoop/HowToRelease. Please refer step-8 in *'Creating the release
candidate (X.Y.Z-RC)' *section.


Thanks,
Rakesh

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:

> Here are a few comments on the proposal of changes to the release process:
>
> - It might be a better idea to preserve the HowToRelease document for
> future reference, clone the document, and change the cloned document to
> reflect the git commands rather than svn.
> - We still need to modify Step 2 to be git oriented, otherwise it will
> look odd that we have svn there.
> - In Step 4, I thought that we had informally agreed to rely on the git
> log rather than maintain the CHANGES.txt file. If we aren't all onboard
> with the idea of stopping to use CHANGES.txt, then we need to discuss this
> separately.
> - Steps 5 and 6: I'm not sure why the steps to produce the release notes
> changes. We still resolve issues on jira which is pretty much the source of
> data for the release notes.
> - Step 10: I personally don't like using "git commit -a" unless you're
> pretty sure that it is what you want. A much safer approach is to run "git
> status" and "git add" to the individual files/directories.
> - Step 11: Why are we tagging with -s? Is that standard practice in other
> projects?
>
> -Flavio
>
> > On 26 Jan 2017, at 03:30, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
> >
> > Agreed, will try to resolve ZK-2184. I have included this to 3.4.10
> > releasing. I could see few open review comments in the PR, probably will
> > push once this is concluded.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Flavio Junqueira 
> wrote:
> >
> >> I'd like to have ZK-2184 in as well. I have seen many cases in which
> >> applications are affected by that problem. If folks can help me push it
> >> through, I'd appreciate.
> >>
> >> -Flavio
> >>
> >>> On 25 Jan 2017, at 17:01, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I've reviewed ZOOKEEPER-2044 pull request and added few comments. I
> hope
> >>> this will be committed soon.
> >>>
> >>> I'm planning to keep the CHANGE.txt file for this release. But, not
> >>> updating the commit history considering that git revision can be used
> as
> >> a
> >>> reference. Please see my comment https://goo.gl/wu5V2M in
> ZOOKEEPER-267

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Agreed, will try to resolve ZK-2184. I have included this to 3.4.10
releasing. I could see few open review comments in the PR, probably will
push once this is concluded.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:

> I'd like to have ZK-2184 in as well. I have seen many cases in which
> applications are affected by that problem. If folks can help me push it
> through, I'd appreciate.
>
> -Flavio
>
> > On 25 Jan 2017, at 17:01, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
> >
> > I've reviewed ZOOKEEPER-2044 pull request and added few comments. I hope
> > this will be committed soon.
> >
> > I'm planning to keep the CHANGE.txt file for this release. But, not
> > updating the commit history considering that git revision can be used as
> a
> > reference. Please see my comment https://goo.gl/wu5V2M in ZOOKEEPER-2672
> > jira.
> >
> > Sometime back, I've filtered the issues which was marked for 3.4.10 and
> > moved out these to 3.4.11 release.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 5:41 AM, Michael Han  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Rakesh,
> >>
> >> Thanks for driving 3.4.10 release.
> >>
> >> I've been looking at https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2044
> >> today I think this could be a good addition to 3.4.10 release - what do
> you
> >> think? Should we get this in 3.4.10?
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> rake...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi folks,
> >>>
> >>> ZOOKEEPER-2573 fix is agreed and will be resolved soon. After
> committing
> >>> this jira, I'm planning to start cutting a release candidate based on
> my
> >>> proposed "HowToRelease" ZK cwiki changes.
> >>>
> >>> Appreciate feedback on proposed ZK cwiki https://cwiki.apache.org/
> >>> confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease changes. Please refer my
> >>> previous
> >>> mail to understand more about it.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Rakesh
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> >> rake...@apache.org
> >>>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> OK. I have modified ZK cwiki page https://cwiki.apache.org/
> >>>> confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease directly. Please review the
> >>> newly
> >>>> added lines in orange color to understand the changes. The following
> >>>> sections has been modified:
> >>>>
> >>>>   - *Updating the release branch -> modified steps **1, 4, 10, 11*
> >>>>   - *Building -> modified step 9*
> >>>>   - *Publishing -> modified step 1*
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Rakesh
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Patrick Hunt 
> >> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Perhaps you can make the changes directly on the wiki page as a
> >>> duplicate
> >>>>> line item under the original in a different color? It's hard for me
> to
> >>>>> really follow, esp as it's not a 1:1 replacement iiuc. Could you try
> >>>>> editing the wiki directly to start with, leave the original line and
> >> add
> >>>>> the new line(s) but in another color or some other indication?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks Rakesh.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Patrick
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> >>> rake...@apache.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi folks,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As we all know, 3.4.10 release is the first ZooKeeper release after
> >>> the
> >>>>>> github repository migration. I have tried an attempt to modify the
> >>> steps
> >>>>>> described in the '
> >>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease'
> >>>>> page
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>> make the release. Since this release is from an already created
> >>> branch,
> >>>>> I
> >>>>>> have focused only the branch

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks Patrick for the comments.

>>>>4 changes.txt - how does one do this? can we provide the exact steps to
the
>>>>RM?
Recently, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2672 issue
created to remove the CHANGE.txt file itself. Sorry for not mentioned this
in the cwiki page. Could you please look at the discussion in this jira.
Probably, will come back to this step once we reach to an agreement. Thanks!

>>>>6. TODO - put this in red? We need to have a process before you can do
the
>>>>release.
I think step-5(previous step) explains the way to prepare release notes and
that is sufficient for us, right?. Also, I'm not sure the intention of this
new mechanism and don't know who added this step. Is this a blocking point
for this release?

>>>>11. tagging - the -s indicates signed tag, is that right? (seems like a
>>>>good idea)
Yes, its a signed tag. I've followed Hadoop's way
https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToRelease. Please refer step-8 in
'Creating the release candidate (X.Y.Z-RC)' section. I hope you are
agreeing to this approach.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:24 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> Thanks for driving this Rakesh. I finally got some time to try the changes
> (as much as possible w/o cutting a release myself) and noticed the
> following:
>
> 4 changes.txt - how does one do this? can we provide the exact steps to the
> RM?
>
> 6. TODO - put this in red? We need to have a process before you can do the
> release.
>
> 11. tagging - the -s indicates signed tag, is that right? (seems like a
> good idea)
>
> Otherwise everything looked correct to me. It's consistent with what we are
> doing with SVN previously afaict. Remind me after the release is published,
> we should review the state of things at that point and ensure that that
> state is what we expect (e.g. compare to the published state of previous
> release(s)).
>
> Regards,
>
> Patrick
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 10:41 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan  >
> wrote:
>
> > OK. I have modified ZK cwiki page
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease
> > directly. Please review the newly added lines in orange color to
> understand
> > the changes. The following sections has been modified:
> >
> >- *Updating the release branch -> modified steps **1, 4, 10, 11*
> >- *Building -> modified step 9*
> >- *Publishing -> modified step 1*
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> >
> > > Perhaps you can make the changes directly on the wiki page as a
> duplicate
> > > line item under the original in a different color? It's hard for me to
> > > really follow, esp as it's not a 1:1 replacement iiuc. Could you try
> > > editing the wiki directly to start with, leave the original line and
> add
> > > the new line(s) but in another color or some other indication?
> > >
> > > Thanks Rakesh.
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > rake...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi folks,
> > > >
> > > > As we all know, 3.4.10 release is the first ZooKeeper release after
> the
> > > > github repository migration. I have tried an attempt to modify the
> > steps
> > > > described in the '
> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease'
> > page
> > > > to
> > > > make the release. Since this release is from an already created
> > branch, I
> > > > have focused only the branch related parts in cwiki and below
> sections
> > in
> > > > the page needed changes like,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > *Updating the release branch*
> > > > 1. Check out the branch with:
> > > > git clone -b branch-X.Y
> > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/zookeeper.git
> > > >
> > > > 2. I'm skipping this step, which is not required now.
> > > >
> > > > 4. Update CHANGES.txt with the committed jira details. As we follow
> PR
> > > > merging, most of the jira info is not updated in this file. I believe
> > > > release manager need to update this file to capture the jira details
> > > marked
> > > > for that release.
> > > >
> > > > 10. Commit these changes.
> > > > git commit -a -m "Preparing for release X

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

I've reviewed ZOOKEEPER-2044 pull request and added few comments. I hope
this will be committed soon.

I'm planning to keep the CHANGE.txt file for this release. But, not
updating the commit history considering that git revision can be used as a
reference. Please see my comment https://goo.gl/wu5V2M in ZOOKEEPER-2672
jira.

Sometime back, I've filtered the issues which was marked for 3.4.10 and
moved out these to 3.4.11 release.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 5:41 AM, Michael Han  wrote:

> Hi Rakesh,
>
> Thanks for driving 3.4.10 release.
>
> I've been looking at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2044
> today I think this could be a good addition to 3.4.10 release - what do you
> think? Should we get this in 3.4.10?
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > ZOOKEEPER-2573 fix is agreed and will be resolved soon. After committing
> > this jira, I'm planning to start cutting a release candidate based on my
> > proposed "HowToRelease" ZK cwiki changes.
> >
> > Appreciate feedback on proposed ZK cwiki https://cwiki.apache.org/
> > confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease changes. Please refer my
> > previous
> > mail to understand more about it.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> rake...@apache.org
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > OK. I have modified ZK cwiki page https://cwiki.apache.org/
> > > confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease directly. Please review the
> > newly
> > > added lines in orange color to understand the changes. The following
> > > sections has been modified:
> > >
> > >- *Updating the release branch -> modified steps **1, 4, 10, 11*
> > >- *Building -> modified step 9*
> > >- *Publishing -> modified step 1*
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Rakesh
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Patrick Hunt 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Perhaps you can make the changes directly on the wiki page as a
> > duplicate
> > >> line item under the original in a different color? It's hard for me to
> > >> really follow, esp as it's not a 1:1 replacement iiuc. Could you try
> > >> editing the wiki directly to start with, leave the original line and
> add
> > >> the new line(s) but in another color or some other indication?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks Rakesh.
> > >>
> > >> Patrick
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > rake...@apache.org
> > >> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi folks,
> > >> >
> > >> > As we all know, 3.4.10 release is the first ZooKeeper release after
> > the
> > >> > github repository migration. I have tried an attempt to modify the
> > steps
> > >> > described in the '
> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease'
> > >> page
> > >> > to
> > >> > make the release. Since this release is from an already created
> > branch,
> > >> I
> > >> > have focused only the branch related parts in cwiki and below
> sections
> > >> in
> > >> > the page needed changes like,
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > *Updating the release branch*
> > >> > 1. Check out the branch with:
> > >> > git clone -b branch-X.Y
> > >> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/zookeeper.git
> > >> >
> > >> > 2. I'm skipping this step, which is not required now.
> > >> >
> > >> > 4. Update CHANGES.txt with the committed jira details. As we follow
> PR
> > >> > merging, most of the jira info is not updated in this file. I
> believe
> > >> > release manager need to update this file to capture the jira details
> > >> marked
> > >> > for that release.
> > >> >
> > >> > 10. Commit these changes.
> > >> > git commit -a -m "Preparing for release X.Y.Z"
> > >> > git push  
> > >> >
> > >> > 11. Tag the release candidate (R is the release candidate number,
> and
> > >> > starts from 0):
> > >> > git tag -s release-X.Y.Z-rcR -m "ZooKeeper X.Y.Z-rcR release."

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi folks,

ZOOKEEPER-2573 fix is agreed and will be resolved soon. After committing
this jira, I'm planning to start cutting a release candidate based on my
proposed "HowToRelease" ZK cwiki changes.

Appreciate feedback on proposed ZK cwiki https://cwiki.apache.org/
confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease changes. Please refer my previous
mail to understand more about it.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> OK. I have modified ZK cwiki page https://cwiki.apache.org/
> confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease directly. Please review the newly
> added lines in orange color to understand the changes. The following
> sections has been modified:
>
>- *Updating the release branch -> modified steps **1, 4, 10, 11*
>- *Building -> modified step 9*
>- *Publishing -> modified step 1*
>
> Thanks,
> Rakesh
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>
>> Perhaps you can make the changes directly on the wiki page as a duplicate
>> line item under the original in a different color? It's hard for me to
>> really follow, esp as it's not a 1:1 replacement iiuc. Could you try
>> editing the wiki directly to start with, leave the original line and add
>> the new line(s) but in another color or some other indication?
>>
>> Thanks Rakesh.
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan > >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi folks,
>> >
>> > As we all know, 3.4.10 release is the first ZooKeeper release after the
>> > github repository migration. I have tried an attempt to modify the steps
>> > described in the '
>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease'
>> page
>> > to
>> > make the release. Since this release is from an already created branch,
>> I
>> > have focused only the branch related parts in cwiki and below sections
>> in
>> > the page needed changes like,
>> >
>> >
>> > *Updating the release branch*
>> > 1. Check out the branch with:
>> > git clone -b branch-X.Y
>> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/zookeeper.git
>> >
>> > 2. I'm skipping this step, which is not required now.
>> >
>> > 4. Update CHANGES.txt with the committed jira details. As we follow PR
>> > merging, most of the jira info is not updated in this file. I believe
>> > release manager need to update this file to capture the jira details
>> marked
>> > for that release.
>> >
>> > 10. Commit these changes.
>> > git commit -a -m "Preparing for release X.Y.Z"
>> > git push  
>> >
>> > 11. Tag the release candidate (R is the release candidate number, and
>> > starts from 0):
>> > git tag -s release-X.Y.Z-rcR -m "ZooKeeper X.Y.Z-rcR release."
>> >
>> > Push the newly created rc tag to the remote repo.
>> > git push  release-X.Y.Z-rcR
>> >
>> >
>> > *Building*
>> > 9. Call for a release vote on dev
>> >   In the release candidate dev mail format, it needs to change
>> the
>> > tag like,
>> >
>> >   "The RC tag in git to be voted upon: release-X.Y.Z-rcR"
>> >
>> >
>> > *Publishing*
>> > 1. Tag the release:
>> > git tag -s release-X.Y.Z -m "ZooKeeper X.Y.Z release."
>> >
>> > Push the newly created release tag to the remote repo.
>> > git push  release-X.Y.Z
>> >
>> >
>> > I'd like to know whether I'm going in the right direction and start
>> cutting
>> > the 3.4.10 release by following this approach. Thanks!
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Rakesh
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
>> rake...@apache.org
>> > >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Thanks for pointing this jira. I will take a look at this.
>> > >
>> > > Rakesh
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:27 PM, Edward Ribeiro <
>> > edward.ribe...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Hi Rakesh,
>> > >>
>> > >> Thansk for stepping up to this task! Pretty cool! :)
>> > >>
>> > >> Do you think https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2573 is
>> > >> worth
>> > >> targeting 3.4.10 too?
>> > >>
>> > >>

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New Apache ZooKeeper Committer: Mohammad Arshad

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Congratulations, Arshad!

Rakesh

On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:29 AM, Michael Han  wrote:

> Congratulations and welcome aboard, Arshad!
>
> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 5:34 AM, Edward Ribeiro 
> wrote:
>
> > Congrats, Arshad! Super well deserved! :)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Eddie
> >
> > Em 21 de jan de 2017 11:25 AM, "Flavio Junqueira" 
> > escreveu:
> >
> > > The Apache ZooKeeper PMC has voted to offer committership to Arshad and
> > he
> > > accepted. Arshad has contributed significantly to this community in the
> > > recent past, and we expect his level of engagement and contribution to
> > > increase with committership.
> > >
> > > Congratulations, Arshad!
> > >
> > > -Flavio on behalf of the Apache ZooKeeper PMC
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Michael.
>

Re: Willing to Contribute to this Project

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thank you for your interest in ZooKeeper!

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToContribute wiki
page is a good resource for new folks interested in participating.

Please feel free to post patches on ZooKeeper JIRA issues that interest
you. If there is any question about how to proceed on an issue, then please
either discuss directly on the JIRA or send an e-mail to ZooKeeper dev list.

Helper links:-
Issue Tracker: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER
Mailing list: http://zookeeper.apache.org/lists.html
Docs: https://zookeeper.apache.org/doc/r3.5.2-alpha/

Cheers,
Rakesh

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Amol Kulkarni  wrote:

> Hi there,
>
> This is Amol Kulkarni here,i'm looking forward to contribute to open source
> projects in Java technologies and came across the zookeeper project.
> I'm willing to contribute to make any changes/issues available.
> I have been working Java technologies for the last 5 year's,looking forward
> to contribute in projects.
>
> Would be very greatful,if get assistance  to get an idea how to start with
> it.
> Awaiting your response.
>
> --
> *Thanks & Regards*
> *Amol Kulkarni *
>

Re: ZooKeeper cwiki - Updated ZooKeeper and SASL auth 1045 work

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi PMCs,

I don't have permission to delete cwiki page. Presently, I have renamed our
old sasl page to "https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/
Zookeeper+and+SASL-Backup". Could you please delete this page from
ZooKeeper project cwiki pages. Thanks!

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 10:31 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> FYI, I'm planning to delete our existing "https://cwiki.apache.org/conf
> luence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Zookeeper+and+SASL" web page by tomorrow (IST).
>
> Then rename https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/
> ZOOKEEPER/ZooKeeper+and+SASL+authentication web page to "
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Zookeeper+and+SASL";
> in place of the deleted page.
>
> Please let me know if you have any comments. Thanks!
>
> Regards,
> Rakesh
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
>> Like I mentioned at the beginning of this mail thread, presently I've
>> maintained this original page as a history. How about deleting this old
>> page now and rename the newly added "https://cwiki.apache.org/conf
>> luence/display/ZOOKEEPER/ZooKeeper+and+SASL+authentication" in place of
>> the old page? I think, that will help the existing webpages to continue
>> referring to a valid cwiki ZK sasl page. Otw those links becomes stale.
>>
>> I could see many blogs, wiki already have a reference link to our
>> existing "https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Zooke
>> eper+and+SASL" page.
>>
>> Following are few blogs/sites which has a reference to the ZK SASL page:-
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-38%3A+
>> ZooKeeper+Authentication
>> http://blog.intelligencecomputing.io/security/12409/repost-z
>> ookeeper-and-sasl
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Rakesh
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>>
>>> LGTM. Those changes are very helpful, thanks Rakesh!
>>>
>>> Patrick
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
>>> rake...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Thanks a lot Patrick Hunt for the review comments. Please take another
>>> look
>>> > at the wiki page when you get a chance.
>>> >
>>> > I've updated the wiki page addressing these,.
>>> >
>>> > 1) ===> DONE. Added JCE encryption part.
>>> > 2) ===> DONE. Corrected case.
>>> > 3) ===> DONE. Included version.
>>> > 4) ===> DONE. Corrected numbering format.
>>> > 5) ===> DONE. Added an example case to understand the tuning mechanism.
>>> > 6) ===> DONE. I've removed this part because it can be discussed
>>> separately
>>> > and added if someone has a use case.
>>> > 7) ===> DONE. Rephrased upgrade feature section
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Rakesh
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Patrick Hunt 
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Nice job Rakesh, some comments:
>>> > >
>>> > > 1) the appendix is a great idea, should be useful for many people.
>>> One
>>> > > thing I noticed
>>> > > "There is no additional dependencies needed to use SASL with Java
>>> since
>>> > it
>>> > > is part of the the Java Standard Edition." - you might want to
>>> > mention/link
>>> > > the JCE? The JVM doesn't come with very modern encryption - some of
>>> the
>>> > > distros use more strong encryption out of the box with kerberos.
>>> I've run
>>> > > into this a number of times (need to also install JCE).
>>> > >
>>> > > 2) consistently use "ZooKeeper" rather than "Zookeeper". Only noticed
>>> > this
>>> > > in a few places...
>>> > >
>>> > > 3) on client-server it would be good to mention when it was added
>>> > (3.4.0+),
>>> > > similar to what you did with 1045.
>>> > >
>>> > > 4) on "ZooKeeper SASL configurations" the numbering of the bullets
>>> starts
>>> > > at 2.1. and finishes at 2.4. I suspect the formatting didn't copy
>>> over
>>> > > quite right?
>>> > >
>>> > > 5) similar formatting issue for "# Defaulting to
>>> > > 20quorum.cnxn.thre

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

OK. I have modified ZK cwiki page
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease
directly. Please review the newly added lines in orange color to understand
the changes. The following sections has been modified:

   - *Updating the release branch -> modified steps **1, 4, 10, 11*
   - *Building -> modified step 9*
   - *Publishing -> modified step 1*

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> Perhaps you can make the changes directly on the wiki page as a duplicate
> line item under the original in a different color? It's hard for me to
> really follow, esp as it's not a 1:1 replacement iiuc. Could you try
> editing the wiki directly to start with, leave the original line and add
> the new line(s) but in another color or some other indication?
>
> Thanks Rakesh.
>
> Patrick
>
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > As we all know, 3.4.10 release is the first ZooKeeper release after the
> > github repository migration. I have tried an attempt to modify the steps
> > described in the '
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease' page
> > to
> > make the release. Since this release is from an already created branch, I
> > have focused only the branch related parts in cwiki and below sections in
> > the page needed changes like,
> >
> >
> > *Updating the release branch*
> > 1. Check out the branch with:
> > git clone -b branch-X.Y
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/zookeeper.git
> >
> > 2. I'm skipping this step, which is not required now.
> >
> > 4. Update CHANGES.txt with the committed jira details. As we follow PR
> > merging, most of the jira info is not updated in this file. I believe
> > release manager need to update this file to capture the jira details
> marked
> > for that release.
> >
> > 10. Commit these changes.
> > git commit -a -m "Preparing for release X.Y.Z"
> > git push  
> >
> > 11. Tag the release candidate (R is the release candidate number, and
> > starts from 0):
> > git tag -s release-X.Y.Z-rcR -m "ZooKeeper X.Y.Z-rcR release."
> >
> > Push the newly created rc tag to the remote repo.
> > git push  release-X.Y.Z-rcR
> >
> >
> > *Building*
> > 9. Call for a release vote on dev
> >   In the release candidate dev mail format, it needs to change
> the
> > tag like,
> >
> >   "The RC tag in git to be voted upon: release-X.Y.Z-rcR"
> >
> >
> > *Publishing*
> > 1. Tag the release:
> > git tag -s release-X.Y.Z -m "ZooKeeper X.Y.Z release."
> >
> > Push the newly created release tag to the remote repo.
> > git push  release-X.Y.Z
> >
> >
> > I'd like to know whether I'm going in the right direction and start
> cutting
> > the 3.4.10 release by following this approach. Thanks!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> rake...@apache.org
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for pointing this jira. I will take a look at this.
> > >
> > > Rakesh
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:27 PM, Edward Ribeiro <
> > edward.ribe...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Rakesh,
> > >>
> > >> Thansk for stepping up to this task! Pretty cool! :)
> > >>
> > >> Do you think https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2573 is
> > >> worth
> > >> targeting 3.4.10 too?
> > >>
> > >> Edward
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > rake...@apache.org
> > >> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi All,
> > >> >
> > >> > I hope to cut an RC in a week - giving some more time for your
> > favorite
> > >> > outstanding blocker/critical issues. Will start moving out any
> tickets
> > >> that
> > >> > are not blockers and/or won’t fit the timeline - there are 1
> blocker,
> > 5
> > >> > critical, 15 major, 7 minor tickets outstanding as of now.
> Appreciate
> > >> your
> > >> > support in releasing 3.4.10 version. Thanks!
> > >> >
> > >> > Please find the open issues marked for 3.4.10 release here,
> > >> &

Re: ZooKeeper cwiki - Updated ZooKeeper and SASL auth 1045 work

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi All,

FYI, I'm planning to delete our existing "https://cwiki.apache.org/
confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Zookeeper+and+SASL" web page by tomorrow (IST).

Then rename https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/
ZooKeeper+and+SASL+authentication web page to "https://cwiki.apache.org/
confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Zookeeper+and+SASL" in place of the deleted
page.

Please let me know if you have any comments. Thanks!

Regards,
Rakesh

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> Like I mentioned at the beginning of this mail thread, presently I've
> maintained this original page as a history. How about deleting this old
> page now and rename the newly added "https://cwiki.apache.org/
> confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/ZooKeeper+and+SASL+authentication" in place
> of the old page? I think, that will help the existing webpages to continue
> referring to a valid cwiki ZK sasl page. Otw those links becomes stale.
>
> I could see many blogs, wiki already have a reference link to our existing
> "https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Zookeeper+and+SASL";
> page.
>
> Following are few blogs/sites which has a reference to the ZK SASL page:-
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> 38%3A+ZooKeeper+Authentication
> http://blog.intelligencecomputing.io/security/12409/repost-
> zookeeper-and-sasl
>
> Thanks,
> Rakesh
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>
>> LGTM. Those changes are very helpful, thanks Rakesh!
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
>> rake...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks a lot Patrick Hunt for the review comments. Please take another
>> look
>> > at the wiki page when you get a chance.
>> >
>> > I've updated the wiki page addressing these,.
>> >
>> > 1) ===> DONE. Added JCE encryption part.
>> > 2) ===> DONE. Corrected case.
>> > 3) ===> DONE. Included version.
>> > 4) ===> DONE. Corrected numbering format.
>> > 5) ===> DONE. Added an example case to understand the tuning mechanism.
>> > 6) ===> DONE. I've removed this part because it can be discussed
>> separately
>> > and added if someone has a use case.
>> > 7) ===> DONE. Rephrased upgrade feature section
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Rakesh
>> >
>> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>> >
>> > > Nice job Rakesh, some comments:
>> > >
>> > > 1) the appendix is a great idea, should be useful for many people. One
>> > > thing I noticed
>> > > "There is no additional dependencies needed to use SASL with Java
>> since
>> > it
>> > > is part of the the Java Standard Edition." - you might want to
>> > mention/link
>> > > the JCE? The JVM doesn't come with very modern encryption - some of
>> the
>> > > distros use more strong encryption out of the box with kerberos. I've
>> run
>> > > into this a number of times (need to also install JCE).
>> > >
>> > > 2) consistently use "ZooKeeper" rather than "Zookeeper". Only noticed
>> > this
>> > > in a few places...
>> > >
>> > > 3) on client-server it would be good to mention when it was added
>> > (3.4.0+),
>> > > similar to what you did with 1045.
>> > >
>> > > 4) on "ZooKeeper SASL configurations" the numbering of the bullets
>> starts
>> > > at 2.1. and finishes at 2.4. I suspect the formatting didn't copy over
>> > > quite right?
>> > >
>> > > 5) similar formatting issue for "# Defaulting to
>> > > 20quorum.cnxn.threads.size=20"
>> > >
>> > > Can we give any insight into how this value should be set? i.e. why
>> is 20
>> > > the default and when should it be raised/lowered?
>> > >
>> > > 6) can the doc shed any light on why we are recommending
>> > > "javax.security.auth.useSubjectCredsOnly=false" ? I'm not familiar
>> with
>> > > this myself.
>> > >
>> > > 7) "This feature is supported in 3.4 branch" is ambiguous - perhaps
>> > > rephrase. What "feature" are you referring to, 1045 or to rolling
>> > upgrade?
>> > > Also the ref to 3.4 itself is ambiguous - perhaps change to 3.4.10+?
>> > >
>> > &g

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi folks,

As we all know, 3.4.10 release is the first ZooKeeper release after the
github repository migration. I have tried an attempt to modify the steps
described in the '
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease' page to
make the release. Since this release is from an already created branch, I
have focused only the branch related parts in cwiki and below sections in
the page needed changes like,


*Updating the release branch*
1. Check out the branch with:
git clone -b branch-X.Y
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/zookeeper.git

2. I'm skipping this step, which is not required now.

4. Update CHANGES.txt with the committed jira details. As we follow PR
merging, most of the jira info is not updated in this file. I believe
release manager need to update this file to capture the jira details marked
for that release.

10. Commit these changes.
git commit -a -m "Preparing for release X.Y.Z"
git push  

11. Tag the release candidate (R is the release candidate number, and
starts from 0):
git tag -s release-X.Y.Z-rcR -m "ZooKeeper X.Y.Z-rcR release."

Push the newly created rc tag to the remote repo.
git push  release-X.Y.Z-rcR


*Building*
9. Call for a release vote on dev
  In the release candidate dev mail format, it needs to change the
tag like,

  "The RC tag in git to be voted upon: release-X.Y.Z-rcR"


*Publishing*
1. Tag the release:
git tag -s release-X.Y.Z -m "ZooKeeper X.Y.Z release."

Push the newly created release tag to the remote repo.
git push  release-X.Y.Z


I'd like to know whether I'm going in the right direction and start cutting
the 3.4.10 release by following this approach. Thanks!

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> Thanks for pointing this jira. I will take a look at this.
>
> Rakesh
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:27 PM, Edward Ribeiro 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Rakesh,
>>
>> Thansk for stepping up to this task! Pretty cool! :)
>>
>> Do you think https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2573 is
>> worth
>> targeting 3.4.10 too?
>>
>> Edward
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan > >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > I hope to cut an RC in a week - giving some more time for your favorite
>> > outstanding blocker/critical issues. Will start moving out any tickets
>> that
>> > are not blockers and/or won’t fit the timeline - there are 1 blocker, 5
>> > critical, 15 major, 7 minor tickets outstanding as of now. Appreciate
>> your
>> > support in releasing 3.4.10 version. Thanks!
>> >
>> > Please find the open issues marked for 3.4.10 release here,
>> > https://goo.gl/XdraFA
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Rakesh
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
>> rake...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi All,
>> > >
>> > > I am interested in going through the release process as the RM.
>> > >
>> > > Overall, I could see total 41 issues marked for 3.4.10 release as of
>> now,
>> > > which includes 4 blockers, 5 critical, 20 major and 12 minor issues. I
>> > > count 9 issues fixed/committed already for 3.4.10 which includes 1
>> > blocker
>> > > and 1 critical(security related) issue. ZOOKEEPER-1045 is a much
>> awaited
>> > > one and the feature code is committed. I think it is a good time to
>> > > initiate the discussion of 3.4.10 release processes.
>> > >
>> > > Please find the issues marked for 3.4.10 release here,
>> > > https://goo.gl/FfbpVG
>> > >
>> > > Currently, I'm focusing on updating ZOOKEEPER-1045 feature details
>> into
>> > > our project cwiki and related ZOOKEEPER-2479 improvement jira. I'd
>> like
>> > to
>> > > include ZOOKEEPER-2383 into this release if everyone agrees.
>> Appreciate
>> > > your help in reviewing the jira patches and making it stable for
>> release.
>> > > Also, please feel free to push your favorite issues ahead of 3.4.10
>> > release.
>> > >
>> > > I hope with the community support, we should be able to close all
>> > > necessary blockers/critical issues soon. Kindly requesting everyone to
>> > look
>> > > at the issues marked for 3.4.10 and push these asap or can be pushed
>> out
>> > to
>> > > 3.4.11.
>> > >
>> > > Imp: Since we moved to github repository, the release procedure
>> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease
>> > > requires changes. Appreciate your help in this part. Thanks!
>> > >
>> > > Please let me know your thoughts on the plan.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Rakesh
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks for pointing this jira. I will take a look at this.

Rakesh

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:27 PM, Edward Ribeiro 
wrote:

> Hi Rakesh,
>
> Thansk for stepping up to this task! Pretty cool! :)
>
> Do you think https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2573 is worth
> targeting 3.4.10 too?
>
> Edward
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I hope to cut an RC in a week - giving some more time for your favorite
> > outstanding blocker/critical issues. Will start moving out any tickets
> that
> > are not blockers and/or won’t fit the timeline - there are 1 blocker, 5
> > critical, 15 major, 7 minor tickets outstanding as of now. Appreciate
> your
> > support in releasing 3.4.10 version. Thanks!
> >
> > Please find the open issues marked for 3.4.10 release here,
> > https://goo.gl/XdraFA
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rakesh
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I am interested in going through the release process as the RM.
> > >
> > > Overall, I could see total 41 issues marked for 3.4.10 release as of
> now,
> > > which includes 4 blockers, 5 critical, 20 major and 12 minor issues. I
> > > count 9 issues fixed/committed already for 3.4.10 which includes 1
> > blocker
> > > and 1 critical(security related) issue. ZOOKEEPER-1045 is a much
> awaited
> > > one and the feature code is committed. I think it is a good time to
> > > initiate the discussion of 3.4.10 release processes.
> > >
> > > Please find the issues marked for 3.4.10 release here,
> > > https://goo.gl/FfbpVG
> > >
> > > Currently, I'm focusing on updating ZOOKEEPER-1045 feature details into
> > > our project cwiki and related ZOOKEEPER-2479 improvement jira. I'd like
> > to
> > > include ZOOKEEPER-2383 into this release if everyone agrees. Appreciate
> > > your help in reviewing the jira patches and making it stable for
> release.
> > > Also, please feel free to push your favorite issues ahead of 3.4.10
> > release.
> > >
> > > I hope with the community support, we should be able to close all
> > > necessary blockers/critical issues soon. Kindly requesting everyone to
> > look
> > > at the issues marked for 3.4.10 and push these asap or can be pushed
> out
> > to
> > > 3.4.11.
> > >
> > > Imp: Since we moved to github repository, the release procedure
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease
> > > requires changes. Appreciate your help in this part. Thanks!
> > >
> > > Please let me know your thoughts on the plan.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Rakesh
> > >
> >
>

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi All,

I hope to cut an RC in a week - giving some more time for your favorite
outstanding blocker/critical issues. Will start moving out any tickets that
are not blockers and/or won’t fit the timeline - there are 1 blocker, 5
critical, 15 major, 7 minor tickets outstanding as of now. Appreciate your
support in releasing 3.4.10 version. Thanks!

Please find the open issues marked for 3.4.10 release here,
https://goo.gl/XdraFA

Thanks,
Rakesh


On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I am interested in going through the release process as the RM.
>
> Overall, I could see total 41 issues marked for 3.4.10 release as of now,
> which includes 4 blockers, 5 critical, 20 major and 12 minor issues. I
> count 9 issues fixed/committed already for 3.4.10 which includes 1 blocker
> and 1 critical(security related) issue. ZOOKEEPER-1045 is a much awaited
> one and the feature code is committed. I think it is a good time to
> initiate the discussion of 3.4.10 release processes.
>
> Please find the issues marked for 3.4.10 release here,
> https://goo.gl/FfbpVG
>
> Currently, I'm focusing on updating ZOOKEEPER-1045 feature details into
> our project cwiki and related ZOOKEEPER-2479 improvement jira. I'd like to
> include ZOOKEEPER-2383 into this release if everyone agrees. Appreciate
> your help in reviewing the jira patches and making it stable for release.
> Also, please feel free to push your favorite issues ahead of 3.4.10 release.
>
> I hope with the community support, we should be able to close all
> necessary blockers/critical issues soon. Kindly requesting everyone to look
> at the issues marked for 3.4.10 and push these asap or can be pushed out to
> 3.4.11.
>
> Imp: Since we moved to github repository, the release procedure
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease
> requires changes. Appreciate your help in this part. Thanks!
>
> Please let me know your thoughts on the plan.
>
> Thanks,
> Rakesh
>

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New ZooKeeper committer: Michael Han

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Congrats Michael, and welcome!

Rakesh

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 12:59 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> The Apache ZooKeeper PMC recently extended committer karma to Michael and
> he has accepted. Michael has made some great contributions and we are
> looking forward to even more :)
>
> Congratulations and welcome aboard, Michael!
> Patrick
>

Re: ZooKeeper cwiki - Updated ZooKeeper and SASL auth 1045 work

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Like I mentioned at the beginning of this mail thread, presently I've
maintained this original page as a history. How about deleting this old
page now and rename the newly added "
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/ZooKeeper+and+SASL+authentication";
in place of the old page? I think, that will help the existing webpages to
continue referring to a valid cwiki ZK sasl page. Otw those links becomes
stale.

I could see many blogs, wiki already have a reference link to our existing "
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Zookeeper+and+SASL";
page.

Following are few blogs/sites which has a reference to the ZK SASL page:-
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-38%3A+ZooKeeper+Authentication
http://blog.intelligencecomputing.io/security/12409/repost-zookeeper-and-sasl

Thanks,
Rakesh


On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> LGTM. Those changes are very helpful, thanks Rakesh!
>
> Patrick
>
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan  >
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks a lot Patrick Hunt for the review comments. Please take another
> look
> > at the wiki page when you get a chance.
> >
> > I've updated the wiki page addressing these,.
> >
> > 1) ===> DONE. Added JCE encryption part.
> > 2) ===> DONE. Corrected case.
> > 3) ===> DONE. Included version.
> > 4) ===> DONE. Corrected numbering format.
> > 5) ===> DONE. Added an example case to understand the tuning mechanism.
> > 6) ===> DONE. I've removed this part because it can be discussed
> separately
> > and added if someone has a use case.
> > 7) ===> DONE. Rephrased upgrade feature section
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> >
> > > Nice job Rakesh, some comments:
> > >
> > > 1) the appendix is a great idea, should be useful for many people. One
> > > thing I noticed
> > > "There is no additional dependencies needed to use SASL with Java since
> > it
> > > is part of the the Java Standard Edition." - you might want to
> > mention/link
> > > the JCE? The JVM doesn't come with very modern encryption - some of the
> > > distros use more strong encryption out of the box with kerberos. I've
> run
> > > into this a number of times (need to also install JCE).
> > >
> > > 2) consistently use "ZooKeeper" rather than "Zookeeper". Only noticed
> > this
> > > in a few places...
> > >
> > > 3) on client-server it would be good to mention when it was added
> > (3.4.0+),
> > > similar to what you did with 1045.
> > >
> > > 4) on "ZooKeeper SASL configurations" the numbering of the bullets
> starts
> > > at 2.1. and finishes at 2.4. I suspect the formatting didn't copy over
> > > quite right?
> > >
> > > 5) similar formatting issue for "# Defaulting to
> > > 20quorum.cnxn.threads.size=20"
> > >
> > > Can we give any insight into how this value should be set? i.e. why is
> 20
> > > the default and when should it be raised/lowered?
> > >
> > > 6) can the doc shed any light on why we are recommending
> > > "javax.security.auth.useSubjectCredsOnly=false" ? I'm not familiar
> with
> > > this myself.
> > >
> > > 7) "This feature is supported in 3.4 branch" is ambiguous - perhaps
> > > rephrase. What "feature" are you referring to, 1045 or to rolling
> > upgrade?
> > > Also the ref to 3.4 itself is ambiguous - perhaps change to 3.4.10+?
> > >
> > > These are some minor nits, overall impressive effort -- thanks again
> > > Rakesh!
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 6:56 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > rake...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > I've incorporated ZK-1045 feature details into the Apache ZooKeeper
> > > project
> > > > cwiki. Since "ZooKeeper and SASL" section is quite large I've
> splitted
> > > > ZooKeeper client-server and server-server sections into sub-pages.
> > Please
> > > > read the following page,
> > > >
> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/
> > > ZooKeeper+and+SASL+
> > > > authentication
> > > >
> > > > *ZooKeeper and SASL authentication*
> > > >
> > > >- Client-Server mutual authentication
> > > >- Server-Server mutual authentication
> > > >- Appendix: Kerberos, GSSAPI, SASL, and JAAS
> > > >
> > > > I have reused the content from the "Client-Server" and "Appendix"
> > > sections
> > > > from the existing page
> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/
> > Zookeeper+and+SASL
> > > > Presently I've maintained this original page as a history, probably
> we
> > > need
> > > > to delete this page after everyone agrees on the changes.
> > > >
> > > > Appreciate your feedback, thanks!
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Rakesh
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: ZooKeeper cwiki - Updated ZooKeeper and SASL auth 1045 work

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks a lot Patrick Hunt for the review comments. Please take another look
at the wiki page when you get a chance.

I've updated the wiki page addressing these,.

1) ===> DONE. Added JCE encryption part.
2) ===> DONE. Corrected case.
3) ===> DONE. Included version.
4) ===> DONE. Corrected numbering format.
5) ===> DONE. Added an example case to understand the tuning mechanism.
6) ===> DONE. I've removed this part because it can be discussed separately
and added if someone has a use case.
7) ===> DONE. Rephrased upgrade feature section

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> Nice job Rakesh, some comments:
>
> 1) the appendix is a great idea, should be useful for many people. One
> thing I noticed
> "There is no additional dependencies needed to use SASL with Java since it
> is part of the the Java Standard Edition." - you might want to mention/link
> the JCE? The JVM doesn't come with very modern encryption - some of the
> distros use more strong encryption out of the box with kerberos. I've run
> into this a number of times (need to also install JCE).
>
> 2) consistently use "ZooKeeper" rather than "Zookeeper". Only noticed this
> in a few places...
>
> 3) on client-server it would be good to mention when it was added (3.4.0+),
> similar to what you did with 1045.
>
> 4) on "ZooKeeper SASL configurations" the numbering of the bullets starts
> at 2.1. and finishes at 2.4. I suspect the formatting didn't copy over
> quite right?
>
> 5) similar formatting issue for "# Defaulting to
> 20quorum.cnxn.threads.size=20"
>
> Can we give any insight into how this value should be set? i.e. why is 20
> the default and when should it be raised/lowered?
>
> 6) can the doc shed any light on why we are recommending
> "javax.security.auth.useSubjectCredsOnly=false" ? I'm not familiar with
> this myself.
>
> 7) "This feature is supported in 3.4 branch" is ambiguous - perhaps
> rephrase. What "feature" are you referring to, 1045 or to rolling upgrade?
> Also the ref to 3.4 itself is ambiguous - perhaps change to 3.4.10+?
>
> These are some minor nits, overall impressive effort -- thanks again
> Rakesh!
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 6:56 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I've incorporated ZK-1045 feature details into the Apache ZooKeeper
> project
> > cwiki. Since "ZooKeeper and SASL" section is quite large I've splitted
> > ZooKeeper client-server and server-server sections into sub-pages. Please
> > read the following page,
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/
> ZooKeeper+and+SASL+
> > authentication
> >
> > *ZooKeeper and SASL authentication*
> >
> >- Client-Server mutual authentication
> >- Server-Server mutual authentication
> >- Appendix: Kerberos, GSSAPI, SASL, and JAAS
> >
> > I have reused the content from the "Client-Server" and "Appendix"
> sections
> > from the existing page
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Zookeeper+and+SASL
> > Presently I've maintained this original page as a history, probably we
> need
> > to delete this page after everyone agrees on the changes.
> >
> > Appreciate your feedback, thanks!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Rakesh
> >
>

Re: Merge pull request using zk-merge-pr.py script

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Before migrating to git, committer has to update the CHANGE.TXT file
manually and then push this along with the approved patch as a single
commit.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On 16-Dec-2016 11:16 AM, "Michael Han"  wrote:

Good catch, I think a couple of recent commits on master branch missing
editing of CHANGE.TXT

How is CHANGE.TXT edited before migrating to git during a commit? Is it
done automatically or manually (that a committer has to update the file)?

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have an observation about the merge PR python script.
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Committing+changes
>
> I could see the commit made using this automated merge script is missing
to
> edit the 'CHANGES.TXT' file and then add the jira details that correspond
> to the patch. I feel, there is an inconsistency between the commit that
> goes via manually and automated script. Welcome comments?
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Rakesh
>



--
Cheers
Michael.

Merge pull request using zk-merge-pr.py script

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi,

I have an observation about the merge PR python script.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Committing+changes

I could see the commit made using this automated merge script is missing to
edit the 'CHANGES.TXT' file and then add the jira details that correspond
to the patch. I feel, there is an inconsistency between the commit that
goes via manually and automated script. Welcome comments?

Thanks & Regards,
Rakesh

Reg ZooKeeper git commit

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi,

Commit Log:-
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=zookeeper.git;a=commit;h=
2afed855ad966d4c4cd0370e6d24a01c04e75d67

My bad, I have made a commit from the system where git user name and mail
id was configured in my colleague's name(PMC of another Apache project). So
the commit shows his details. I'm really sorry for this. One approach is to
use "git commit --amend" after changing the "git config --global user.name and
user.email" in my system. Please advice me if this is the correct way.
Thanks!

Thanks & Regards,
Rakesh

ZooKeeper cwiki - Updated ZooKeeper and SASL auth 1045 work

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi All,

I've incorporated ZK-1045 feature details into the Apache ZooKeeper project
cwiki. Since "ZooKeeper and SASL" section is quite large I've splitted
ZooKeeper client-server and server-server sections into sub-pages. Please
read the following page,

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/ZooKeeper+and+SASL+authentication

*ZooKeeper and SASL authentication*

   - Client-Server mutual authentication
   - Server-Server mutual authentication
   - Appendix: Kerberos, GSSAPI, SASL, and JAAS

I have reused the content from the "Client-Server" and "Appendix" sections
from the existing page
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Zookeeper+and+SASL
Presently I've maintained this original page as a history, probably we need
to delete this page after everyone agrees on the changes.

Appreciate your feedback, thanks!

Regards,
Rakesh

ZooKeeper 3.4.10 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi All,

I am interested in going through the release process as the RM.

Overall, I could see total 41 issues marked for 3.4.10 release as of now,
which includes 4 blockers, 5 critical, 20 major and 12 minor issues. I
count 9 issues fixed/committed already for 3.4.10 which includes 1 blocker
and 1 critical(security related) issue. ZOOKEEPER-1045 is a much awaited
one and the feature code is committed. I think it is a good time to
initiate the discussion of 3.4.10 release processes.

Please find the issues marked for 3.4.10 release here, https://goo.gl/FfbpVG

Currently, I'm focusing on updating ZOOKEEPER-1045 feature details into our
project cwiki and related ZOOKEEPER-2479 improvement jira. I'd like to
include ZOOKEEPER-2383 into this release if everyone agrees. Appreciate
your help in reviewing the jira patches and making it stable for release.
Also, please feel free to push your favorite issues ahead of 3.4.10 release.

I hope with the community support, we should be able to close all necessary
blockers/critical issues soon. Kindly requesting everyone to look at the
issues marked for 3.4.10 and push these asap or can be pushed out to 3.4.11.

Imp: Since we moved to github repository, the release procedure
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease requires
changes. Appreciate your help in this part. Thanks!

Please let me know your thoughts on the plan.

Thanks,
Rakesh

Re: Test plan for ZK-1045 - Call for volunteers

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thank you very much for all your inputs, as well as the helpful discussions
in the community.

Sure, I will start 3.4.10 release plans. Since we have git repo in place,
it requires changes in the release procedure. Let me spend sometime trying
to understand this part.

Regards,
Rakesh

On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 4:52 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> Shoot. Make that 3.4.10. Urg.
>
> Patrick
>
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>
> > I like your second suggestion - let's cut an RC and give everyone the
> time
> > you are suggesting (2 weeks). That way folks can test and/or vote over
> the
> > period, rather than waiting the two weeks then starting the vote
> mechanics.
> > I know there are some people interested in getting access to 3.5.3-alpha
> > asap. Two birds.
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Flavio Junqueira 
> wrote:
> >
> >> My suggestion is that we get this in and let it sit for a couple of
> weeks
> >> before cutting an RC. Alternatively, we could cut an RC and just give
> more
> >> time than the typical 2 weeks for people to test.
> >>
> >> -Flavio
> >>
> >> > On 29 Nov 2016, at 17:23, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I did a bunch of manual testing last week. I tried running multiple
> >> cluster
> >> > sizes, tried running new server against old server, also went through
> >> the
> >> > rolling upgrade testing part of the document and that worked fine.
> >> afaict
> >> > at this point we're ready to commit. If there are any concerns please
> >> speak
> >> > up now as I intend to commit this soon.
> >> >
> >> > Patrick
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Patrick Hunt 
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> As Flavio said originally on this thread this is a big change. Based
> on
> >> >> the current status of the patch and the testing feedback it seems
> like
> >> >> we've done significant work to ensure the quality of the change. Do
> >> folks
> >> >> feel that there has been sufficient review/testing that we can commit
> >> this
> >> >> and cut a 3.5.10 release? If not what specifically is left?
> >> >>
> >> >> Patrick
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Andrew Purtell 
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>>> My view on this-> Since ZK server
> >> >>>> already has "jaas.config" in place for client-server auth, IMHO to
> >> >>> continue
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Right, also build the client-server authentication context
> >> >>> programatically.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> How about pushing the current
> >> >>>> approach as a first step and based on the community interests later
> >> we
> >> >>>> could enhance this feature by programmatically builds the JAAS
> >> context.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Yes, this is what I was suggesting.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks for considering the idea.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> 1) A bad host or bad Kerb principal is keep on trying to establish
> >> >>>> connection with the Quorum.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> 2) Trigger FLE several times.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Let me get back to you.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I think it would also not be difficult to create a new unit test
> that
> >> >>> extends ​QuorumHammerTest (like ObserverQuorumHammerTest), sets up a
> >> >>> secure
> >> >>> configuration using the minikdc, and then uses QuorumBase methods to
> >> start
> >> >>> and stop quorum peers at random while the generated load is hitting
> >> the
> >> >>> quorum.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 7:15 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> >> rake...@apache.org>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> Thanks a lot Andrew Purtell for your time and comments.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> I like how Hadoop programmatically builds the JAAS context
> from
> >> its
> >> >>>>&

Re: Upcoming 3.4/3.5 releases.

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

 Now that ZOOKEEPER-2014 has been committed I think we should cut
 a 3.5.3-alpha release. We're getting close to beta with that one
finalized.
Plan looks good. +1 for a beta version.

I believe Rakesh (please confirm) is interested in releasing 3.4.10
once ZOOKEEPER-1045 is committed.
ZK-1045 is the main feature going with this release + bug fixes. I'm happy
to volunteer this release.
It would be great to have more interested folks involved with the testing.
Appreciate your feedback, thanks!

Blockers of 3.4.10 -> ZK-2383 patch is ready for reviews. ZK-2542, I've
tried an attempt to raise a PR but it need rebase. Also, I will start
visiting all the jira issues marked for 3.4.10 in the coming week.

I will watch/learn the git related work to understand the changes with
respect to releasing.

Regards,
Rakesh

On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Michael Han  wrote:

> The filters link does not work for me. This is my link on blockers of 3.5.3
>  project%20%3D%20ZOOKEEPER%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20Blocker%
> 20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20fixVersio
> n%20%3D%203.5.3%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC>.
> A quick look over these and at least these three issue could be removed
> from blocker without further action: ZOOKEEPER-2314, ZOOKEEPER-2159,
> ZOOKEEPER-2463.
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>
> > Hi folks. Now that ZOOKEEPER-2014 has been committed I think we should
> cut
> > a 3.5.3-alpha release. We're getting close to beta with that one
> finalized.
> > There are about 10 blockers, although I have not recently gone through
> and
> > triaged them
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Dashboard.jspa?selectP
> ageId=12327688
> > note that about half of those are patch available, if you have some free
> > cycles please focus on these, here's the prioritized list:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12336872&;
> > jql=project%20%3D%20zookeeper%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%203.
> > 5.3%20and%20resolution%20%3D%20unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC
> >
> > I believe Rakesh (please confirm) is interested in releasing 3.4.10 once
> > ZOOKEEPER-1045 is committed. That patch has had extensive testing and
> > documentation (kudos Rakesh, et. al.) and is in final review -- unless
> > someone speaks up it will be committed soon, probably next week. Here's
> the
> > prioritized list, not sure of those blockers really are blockers - Flavio
> > do we still need to address the netty license issue:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12338391&;
> > jql=project%20%3D%20zookeeper%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%203.
> > 4.10%20and%20resolution%20%3D%20unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20pr
> iority%20DESC
> >
> > Patrick
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Michael.
>

Re: Apache ZooKeeper Meetup - draft Community Update

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

LGTM. Just a comment -

I'm not sure about ZK talk/presentations delivered in any of the
conferences (ApacheCon or any other event) in this year. Probably can
capture those details, if any.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 3:50 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> Hi folks. Ben asked me to give a quick 5-10 minute overview at the meetup
> tomorrow giving insight into progress over the last year. Please see the
> linked slides that I put together. If you have any comments or thoughts wrt
> things that should be highlighted please respond to me directly. I tried to
> review jira/etc... but I'm sure I missed some important changes. Thanks!
>
> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1aElXcVPNng60BEpRV6qj3j6fFjScK
> 3xSj8_e02e-lFI
>
> Patrick
>

Re: Test plan for ZK-1045 - Call for volunteers

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks a lot Andrew Purtell for your time and comments.

>I like how Hadoop programmatically builds the JAAS context from its
>configuration such that the JAAS configuration file and definition of
>system property pointing to same are not needed. Would be nice if ZK
could
>optionally do the same, that would be one fewer config file to get
>precisely right.

Its really an interesting thought. My view on this-> Since ZK server
already has "jaas.config" in place for client-server auth, IMHO to continue
with this jaas config and allows to configure the 'QuorumServer' &
'QuorumLearner' quorum auth sections. How about pushing the current
approach as a first step and based on the community interests later we
could enhance this feature by programmatically builds the JAAS context.
Does this makes sense to you?


Any suggestions on some kind of hammer test to apply now ?
1) A bad host or bad Kerb principal is keep on trying to establish
connection with the Quorum. Mostly this will increase the load on Leader ZK
server and observe how the system behaves.
2) Trigger FLE several times. This can be done by finding out newly elected
Leader and kill it. Probably can do this many times.


Dear Committers,

Could you please help me pushing ZOOKEEPER-2479 this in. This would help to
evaluate the time taken for FLE(enable or disable auth) and used to compare
time taken in several runs programatically in scripts or so. Thanks!

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 6:59 AM, Andrew Purtell  wrote:

> I would like to relay a working example of a patched 3.4.9 ZK cluster
> running on one host (without containers). I can confirm mutual SASL auth
> among the quorum is required and enforced because when instances were
> slightly misconfigured with incorrect principal strings they couldn't
> participate in the quorum.
>
> 1. Assign extra loopback addresses. Example below is what you need to do
> for FreeBSD:
>
> $ sudo ifconfig lo0 127.0.1.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 alias
> $ sudo ifconfig lo0 127.0.2.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 alias
> $ sudo ifconfig lo0 127.0.3.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 alias
>
> 2. Create Kerberos principals. Example below is for Heimdal, MIT will be
> similar:
>
> $ sudo kadmin -l
> > add --random-key zookeeper
> > add --random-key zookeeper/127.0.1.1
> > add --random-key zookeeper/127.0.2.1
> > add --random-key zookeeper/127.0.3.1
> > ext_keytab --keytab /var/tmp/test/zookeeper.keytab zookeeper
> > ext_keytab --keytab /var/tmp/test/zookeeper.keytab zookeeper/127.0.1.1
> > ext_keytab --keytab /var/tmp/test/zookeeper.keytab zookeeper/127.0.2.1
> > ext_keytab --keytab /var/tmp/test/zookeeper.keytab zookeeper/127.0.3.1
> > exit
>
> 3. Patch ZK with 1045, build a tarball, then unpack it into three install
> directories. Mine are /var/tmp/test/{1,2,3}.
>
> 4. Initialize 'myid' files:
>
> $ mkdir /var/tmp/test/1/data
> $ echo 1 > /var/tmp/test/1/data/myid
> $ mkdir /var/tmp/test/2/data
> $ echo 2 > /var/tmp/test/2/data/myid
> $ mkdir /var/tmp/test/3/data
> $ echo 3 > /var/tmp/test/3/data/myid
>
> 5. Create configuration files for each instance. Below are examples for
> instance 1. You will need to make substitutions for your Kerberos realm
> (mine is LOCAL), and for instances 2 and 3 change the path to the JAAS
> configuration file, path to data directory, and bind address for
> clientPortAddress as appropriate.
>
> conf/java.env:
>
> export
> JVMFLAGS="-Djava.security.auth.login.config=/var/tmp/test/1/conf/jaas.conf
> -Djavax.security.auth.useSubjectCredsOnly=false"
>
> conf/jaas.conf:
>
> QuorumServer {
>   com.sun.security.auth.module.Krb5LoginModule required
>   useKeyTab=true
>   keyTab="/var/tmp/test/zookeeper.keytab"
>   storeKey=true
>   useTicketCache=false
>   debug=false
>   principal="zookeeper/127.0.1.1@LOCAL";
> };
>
> QuorumLearner {
>   com.sun.security.auth.module.Krb5LoginModule required
>   useKeyTab=true
>   keyTab="/var/tmp/test/zookeeper.keytab"
>   storeKey=true
>   useTicketCache=false
>   debug=false
>   principal="zookeeper/127.0.1.1@LOCAL";
> };
>
> conf/zoo.cfg:
>
> tickTime=2000
> initLimit=10
> syncLimit=5
> dataDir=/var/tmp/test/zk/1/data
> clientPort=2181
> clientPortAddress=127.0.1.1
>
> quorum.auth.enableSasl=true
> quorum.auth.learnerRequireSasl=true
> quorum.auth.serverRequireSasl=true
> quorum.auth.learner.loginContext=QuorumLearner
> quorum.auth.server.loginContext=QuorumServer
> quorum.auth.kerberos.servicePrincipal=zookeeper/_HOST
>
> server.1=127.0.1.1:2888:3888
> server.2=127.0.2.1:2888:3888
> server.3=127.0.3.1:2888:3888
>
> 5. Launch the three instances in the foreground in separate terminals.
> Example for instance 1:
>
> $ cd /var/tmp/test/1
> $ bash ./bin/zkServer.sh start-foreground
>
> Having done all this, I can see successful authentication and bootstrap of
> a quorum.
>
> This example shares a keytab. No need to do that if you'd like to be
> pedantic. Clone the keytab file into the separate conf directories and
> update the jaas.conf files.
>
> I like

Re: Test plan for ZK-1045 - Call for volunteers

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

I've uploaded feature document to the ZOOKEEPER-1045 jira, link =>
https://goo.gl/cvzG8A. I hope this doc will help you to setup a secured zk
cluster and start testing the feature. It would be really great to see the
test/review/usability feedback. Thanks!


Rakesh

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:

> Michael Han posted an update to the test plan to the jira and I want to
> call the attention of the community to it. It is a big change that we need
> to be extra careful about because it is supposed to go to the 3.4 branch.
> It'd be great to have more folks in the community involved with the
> testing. If you have cycles and interest, please help with testing.
>
> -Flavio

Re: 3.6.0-alpha release?

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks @Flavio for the initiative. +1 on the idea of "3.6.0-alpha" release
plans.

Just a thought - I'm not sure, whether multiple on going alpha
versions(3.5.x-alpha and 3.6.x-alpha) could create confusion to the users.
I'd prefer to make 3.5.x to a beta or a stable version first, then release
3.6.x-alpha soon. I agree to kick start release planning of "3.6.0-alpha"
and discuss tentative release dates so that it would help the
committers/contributors/users to push their interested work.

Best Regards,
Rakesh

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Michael Han  wrote:

> I think having more frequent release is beneficial to both the project, and
> the users and community, so I am +1 on the idea of cutting out a 3.6 alpha
> release for new features. Regarding additional burden, my understanding is
> the cost would be similar as releasing a beta version such as 3.5.x but
> smaller than releasing a stable version 3.4.x (where stability / quality
> matters), so it seems manageable.
>
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 8:04 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
> jor...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>
> > Obviously, I’d love to see TTL nodes released. For our needs, FWIW, at
> > Elasticsearch we also need ZOOKEEPER-1525  > jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1525> released.
> >
> > -Jordan
> >
> > > On Oct 16, 2016, at 9:55 AM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello there,
> > >
> > > There are a few things interesting in trunk, like the TTL nodes feature
> > and the performance improvement in ZK-2024, and I've been wondering if it
> > would make sense to cut an alpha release for folks to start testing.
> Points
> > to keep in mind are:
> > >
> > > - Positive: There are features that would be good to make available
> > through a release so that the community can start testing more broadly.
> > > - Negative: Our focus will remain in 3.5 until it stabilizes, so
> > creating a 3.6 branch will create some additional burden to the
> community.
> > >
> > > Any thoughts here?
> > >
> > > -Flavio
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Michael.
>

Re: Subscription

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi Rakesh Kumar Singh,

Could you please follow the link https://zookeeper.apache.org/lists.html
details and I hope that will help you to subscribe ZooKeeper mailing list.

Best Regards,
Rakesh

On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Rakesh Singh 
wrote:

> Subscribing
>

Re: 2.4.9 ZooKeeperServer uninitialized variable

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks for the analysis and discussions.

There is already jira raised to address this case, ZOOKEEPER-2383. Its in
patch available state now and waiting for more reviews & +1 votes to push
it upstream.
Appreciate help in resolving this and include this in 3.4.10 version.

Rakesh

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 3:36 AM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:

> I've been able to repro this. There is a race in
> NIOServerCnxnFactory.startup. We start the cnxn factory before we call
> startup on the zookeeper server. If we call createSession from the cnxn
> factory before we start the server, then we get the NPE. An easy way to
> repro is to add a sleep here:
>
> @Override
> public void startup(ZooKeeperServer zks) throws IOException,
> InterruptedException {
> start();
> setZooKeeperServer(zks);
> zks.startdata();
> Thread.sleep(3000);
> zks.startup();
> }
>
> Afaict, this does't cause any problem on the server, and the client will
> simply try again. It is ugly, though, we should fix it for the next release.
>
> I believe the issue that introduced it is ZOOKEEPER-2026.
>
> -Flavio
>
>
> > On 16 Sep 2016, at 20:02, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for reporting this issue. Could you create a jira for this,
> please?
> >
> > Also, small observation, but I think you meant to say 3.4.9 in the
> subject.
> >
> > -Flavio
> >
> >> On 16 Sep 2016, at 05:38, Colin Dupee  wrote:
> >>
> >> It appears sessionTracker was intended to have a value of null, but
> simply has no value assigned (@109).  This results in a failure to compare
> to null in startup (@415), and an object never being created.  While the
> server seems to be at least partially functional, it does produce an NPE on
> startup:
> >> 2016-09-16 00:12:31,285 [NIOServerCxn.Factory:0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:2181]
> WARN  org.apache.zookeeper.server.NIOServerCnxnFactory  - Ignoring
> unexpected runtime exception
> >> java.lang.NullPointerException
> >>at org.apache.zookeeper.server.
> ZooKeeperServer.createSession(ZooKeeperServer.java:597)
> >>at org.apache.zookeeper.server.ZooKeeperServer.
> processConnectRequest(ZooKeeperServer.java:930)
> >>at org.apache.zookeeper.server.NIOServerCnxn.
> readConnectRequest(NIOServerCnxn.java:418)
> >>at org.apache.zookeeper.server.
> NIOServerCnxn.readPayload(NIOServerCnxn.java:198)
> >>at org.apache.zookeeper.server.NIOServerCnxn.doIO(
> NIOServerCnxn.java:244)
> >>at org.apache.zookeeper.server.NIOServerCnxnFactory.run(
> NIOServerCnxnFactory.java:203)
> >>at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
> >>
> >> Colin DUPÉE
> >> Computer Scientist
> >> 3dMD LLC
> >>
> >> +1 770.612.8002, ext. 22 (Atlanta Office)
> >> cdu...@3dmd.com 
> >> 3dMD.com 
> >>
> >> Follow 3dMD on: linkedin.com/company/3dmd  company/3dmd>
> >> Find 3dMD on: facebook.com/3dMDcommunity  3dMDcommunity>
> >> Follow 3dMD on: twitter.com/3dMD 
> >>
> >> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail transmission, including any
> attachments, contains confidential information and is protected by law as a
> legally privileged document and copyright work. Its content is for the sole
> use of the intended recipient(s) and should not be disclosed, given or
> copied to anyone other than the person(s) named or referenced above. Any
> unauthorized review, retransmission, dissemination, or other use of this
> information by other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are
> not the intended recipient and have received this email in error, please
> contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
> message.
> >
>
>

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache ZooKeeper 3.4.9

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

FYI, created ZOOKEEPER-2552 to revisit the release note and do the
corrective actions.

Rakesh

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> Thanks Edward for pointing out this. Its wrongly marked the fix version as
> "3.4.8", all these were created after 3.4.8 version release and has caused
> the trouble. I will raise a jira to correct the release note.
>
> Regards,
> Rakesh
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 5:46 PM, Edward Ribeiro 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have seen a couple of issues listed on http://zookeeper.apache.org/
>> doc/r3.4.9/releasenotes.html
>> <http://zookeeper.apache.org/doc/r3.4.9/releasenotes.html> that are
>> either 'Open' or 'Patch available'. I
>> discover by accident because I will start working on the open one today.
>> ;)
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2512
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2391
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2468
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Edward
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 1:22 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>>
>> > Kudos Rakesh on pushing this through. Thanks to everyone that
>> contributed.
>> >
>> > Patrick
>> >
>> > On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:57 AM, Flavio Junqueira 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Great to see it out! Thanks Rakesh and community.
>> > >
>> > > -Flavio
>> > >
>> > > > On 04 Sep 2016, at 05:32, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > The Apache ZooKeeper team is proud to announce Apache ZooKeeper
>> version
>> > > > 3.4.9.
>> > > >
>> > > > ZooKeeper is a high-performance coordination service for distributed
>> > > > applications. It exposes common services - such as naming,
>> > > > configuration management, synchronization, and group services - in a
>> > > > simple interface so you don't have to write them from scratch. You
>> can
>> > > > use it off-the-shelf to implement consensus, group management,
>> leader
>> > > > election, and presence protocols. And you can build on it for your
>> > > > own, specific needs.
>> > > >
>> > > > For ZooKeeper release details and downloads, visit:
>> > > > http://zookeeper.apache.org/releases.html
>> > > >
>> > > > ZooKeeper 3.4.9 Release Notes are at:
>> > > > http://zookeeper.apache.org/doc/r3.4.9/releasenotes.html
>> > > >
>> > > > We would like to thank the contributors that made the release
>> possible.
>> > > >
>> > > > Regards,
>> > > > The ZooKeeper Team
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache ZooKeeper 3.4.9

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks Edward for pointing out this. Its wrongly marked the fix version as
"3.4.8", all these were created after 3.4.8 version release and has caused
the trouble. I will raise a jira to correct the release note.

Regards,
Rakesh

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 5:46 PM, Edward Ribeiro 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have seen a couple of issues listed on http://zookeeper.apache.org/
> doc/r3.4.9/releasenotes.html
> <http://zookeeper.apache.org/doc/r3.4.9/releasenotes.html> that are
> either 'Open' or 'Patch available'. I
> discover by accident because I will start working on the open one today. ;)
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2512
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2391
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2468
>
> Cheers,
> Edward
>
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 1:22 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>
> > Kudos Rakesh on pushing this through. Thanks to everyone that
> contributed.
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:57 AM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:
> >
> > > Great to see it out! Thanks Rakesh and community.
> > >
> > > -Flavio
> > >
> > > > On 04 Sep 2016, at 05:32, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The Apache ZooKeeper team is proud to announce Apache ZooKeeper
> version
> > > > 3.4.9.
> > > >
> > > > ZooKeeper is a high-performance coordination service for distributed
> > > > applications. It exposes common services - such as naming,
> > > > configuration management, synchronization, and group services - in a
> > > > simple interface so you don't have to write them from scratch. You
> can
> > > > use it off-the-shelf to implement consensus, group management, leader
> > > > election, and presence protocols. And you can build on it for your
> > > > own, specific needs.
> > > >
> > > > For ZooKeeper release details and downloads, visit:
> > > > http://zookeeper.apache.org/releases.html
> > > >
> > > > ZooKeeper 3.4.9 Release Notes are at:
> > > > http://zookeeper.apache.org/doc/r3.4.9/releasenotes.html
> > > >
> > > > We would like to thank the contributors that made the release
> possible.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > The ZooKeeper Team
> > >
> > >
> >
>

[ANNOUNCE] Apache ZooKeeper 3.4.9

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

The Apache ZooKeeper team is proud to announce Apache ZooKeeper version
3.4.9.

ZooKeeper is a high-performance coordination service for distributed
applications. It exposes common services - such as naming,
configuration management, synchronization, and group services - in a
simple interface so you don't have to write them from scratch. You can
use it off-the-shelf to implement consensus, group management, leader
election, and presence protocols. And you can build on it for your
own, specific needs.

For ZooKeeper release details and downloads, visit:
http://zookeeper.apache.org/releases.html

ZooKeeper 3.4.9 Release Notes are at:
http://zookeeper.apache.org/doc/r3.4.9/releasenotes.html

We would like to thank the contributors that made the release possible.

Regards,
The ZooKeeper Team

Fwd: Please add your release data for 'zookeeper'

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi PMC members,

It would be really great if one of you could help me with this part of the
release process, since I am not a PMC member. Thank you!


Rakesh

On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Apache Reporter Service <
no-re...@reporter.apache.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> This is an automated email from reporter.apache.org.
> I see that you just pushed something to our release repository for the
> 'zookeeper' project
> in the following commit:
>
> r15148 at 2016-09-03 04:28:07 + (Sat, 03 Sep 2016)
> Add ZooKeeper 3.4.9 release
>
> If you are a PMC member of this project, we ask that you log on to:
> https://reporter.apache.org/addrelease.html?zookeeper
> and add your release data (version and date) to the database.
>
> If you are not a PMC member, please have a PMC member add this information.
>
> While this is not a requirement, we ask that you still add this data to the
> reporter database, so that people using the Apache Reporter Service will be
> able to see the latest release data for this project.
>
> Also, please ensure that you remove [1] any older releases.
>
> With regards,
> The Apache Reporter Service.
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#when-to-archive
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

With 3  +1 binding votes (the necessary 3 from PMC), 3  +1 non binding
votes (including my own) and
no -1's the vote carries, the vote for candidate 2 passes. I'll work on
publishing the release to the web site.

Thanks all for checking the release.


Rakesh

On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 8:26 PM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> - Built from source
> - Checked NOTICE and LICENSE
> - Checked digests and signature
> - Ran tests and some simple smoke tests
> - Checked release notes
> - Ran rat and couldn't spot any problem in the report
> - Tested that a maven project resolves the dependency fine with the
> staging repo
>
> -Flavio
>
> > On 01 Sep 2016, at 05:50, Chris Nauroth 
> wrote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > -Downloaded tarball and verified signature and checksums.
> > -Verified content of LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt.
> > -Verified correct version information in src/c/include/winconfig.h.
> > -All unit tests passed.
> >
> > Rakesh, thank you for your hard work on this release.
> >
> > --Chris Nauroth
> >
> > On 8/23/16, 2:24 AM, "Rakesh Radhakrishnan"  wrote:
> >
> >This is the third release candidate for 3.4.9. This candidate removes
> the
> >extra *.asc files found in the
> >second candidate.
> >
> >This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.9. It fixes 21 issues,
> including
> >issues that affect ACL cache
> >in DataTree never removes entries, prevent multiple init of login
> object in
> >each ZKSaslClient instance,
> >ZK service becomes unavailable when leader fails to write transaction
> log,
> >upgrade netty version due
> >to security vulnerability (CVE-2014-3488) and others.
> >
> >The full release notes are available at:
> >
> >https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> projectId=12310801&version=12334700
> >
> >*** Please download, test and vote by August 30th 2016, 23:59 UTC+0.
> ***
> >
> >Source files:
> >http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.9-candidate-2
> >
> >Maven staging repo:
> >https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/
> apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.9
> >
> >The tag to be voted upon:
> >https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/zookeeper/tags/release-3.4.9-rc2
> >
> >ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> >http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
> >
> >Should we release this candidate?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Rakesh
> >
> >
>
>

Re: [VOTE] move Apache Zookeeper to git

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

+1 (non-binding)

Rakesh

On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Raúl Gutiérrez Segalés  wrote:

> +1
>
> -rgs
>
> On Aug 31, 2016 3:29 PM, "Benjamin Reed"  wrote:
>
> > flip the switch to git and update the relevant scripts and docs.
> >
> > i couldn't figure out which timeframe this falls under in the voting
> > procedure table, but i think it's safe to go with 3 days, so the vote
> will
> > close on Saturday, September 3 at 6:30pm pdt.
> >
> > +1 from me
> >
>

Re: Issues with release notes in 3.4.9 RC2 (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2)

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

IIUC, the summary of this discussion is that no one (yet) sees the
issues flagged
as blockers for the 3.4.9 release. No one yet has decided to vote -1. (If
anybody has concerns, I'm happy to create another release candidate.)

This [VOTE] is still open, so kindly do review the RC and vote.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 12:04 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> OK, it would be good to update the existing list in 'HowToRelease' page so
> that it will be clear to everyone.
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> I'd request everyone to cast your vote on 3.4.9-RC2 and that would really
> helpful to take the thread ahead. Thank you!
>
> Rakesh
>
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:
>
>> Issues that are "not a problem" are essentially no-ops. Including them is
>> not wrong per se, but I'd say it is unnecessary and adds more lines to the
>> release notes. Unless the goal of the release notes is to list the issues
>> we investigated as part of the release, I'd say that going forward we
>> should exclude issues marked as "not a problem".
>>
>> I don't see the need to -1 the RC2 based on the inclusion of ZK-1676,
>> though.
>>
>> -Flavio
>>
>>
>> > On 29 Aug 2016, at 05:22, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > OK, I got it. Thanks a lot for the clarification.
>> >
>> > Rakesh
>> >
>> > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>> >
>> >> I would say it's acceptable to include 1676 in the release note. IMO we
>> >> shouldn't list things in the release notes if they weren't addressed
>> (typ
>> >> fixed) in that release. However in this case I don't see why it's a
>> very
>> >> big deal - if folks are that interested in the issue they could
>> quickly see
>> >> (by opening the jira) what the resolution was.
>> >>
>> >> Patrick
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 8:38 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
>> rake...@apache.org>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Thanks Patrick, I just referred 3.4.6 release note and I could see
>> >> similar
>> >>> category, ZOOKEEPER-1599 marked resolution as 'Not A Problem' and
>> >> included
>> >>> in 3.4.6 release note. Should we follow the same pattern and
>> >>> include ZOOKEEPER-1676 also in 3.4.9 release note, please correct me
>> if I
>> >>> missed anything.
>> >>>
>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
>> >>> projectId=12310801&version=12323310
>> >>>
>> >>> Rakesh
>> >>>
>> >>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 8:25 AM, Patrick Hunt 
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
>> >>> rake...@apache.org>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Thanks Flavio for taking the discussion ahead. Thanks Michael for
>> >>>> pointing
>> >>>>> out these cases.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Looking at release notes:
>> >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?p
>> >>>>> rojectId=12310801&version=12334700
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>  - [ZOOKEEPER-2396 <https://issues.apache.org/jir
>> >>>>> a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2396>]
>> >>>>>>>>  - Login object in ZooKeeperSaslClient is static
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9.
>> >> Maybe
>> >>>>> there
>> >>>>>>>> was a mistake on marking the target version as 3.4.9? Should we
>> >>> keep
>> >>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>> in relesae note or remove it?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> It is resolved through a different issue, ZK-2139. I can go either,
>> >>>>> including or excluding it.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I would wait to see others response.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>  - [ZOOKEEPER-1676 <https://is

Re: switching to git?

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

+1

Rakesh

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 11:05 PM, Benjamin Reed  wrote:

> i'm starting to get back into zk development :) i'm a bit distressed that
> we are still using svn and patches managed by jiras. i've gotten extremely
> spoiled by gerritt and phabricator over the years!
>
> as a first step to more efficient workflows for contributors and committers
> can we move to git? i had an offline conversation with pat and he knows how
> to flip the switch.
>
> thanx
> ben
>

Status: Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi All,

With inclusion of my own +1 (non-binding), the current tally on the [VOTE]
for release 3.4.9 candidate 2 is:

1 +1 (binding)
2 +1 (non-binding)

If required, I will extend the voting to one more week September 7th 2016,
23:59 UTC+0.

I'd request everyone to cast your vote on 3.4.9-RC2 and that would be
really helpful to take the thread ahead. Thank you!


Rakesh

Re: Issues with release notes in 3.4.9 RC2 (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2)

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

OK, it would be good to update the existing list in 'HowToRelease' page so
that it will be clear to everyone.


Hi All,

I'd request everyone to cast your vote on 3.4.9-RC2 and that would really
helpful to take the thread ahead. Thank you!

Rakesh

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:

> Issues that are "not a problem" are essentially no-ops. Including them is
> not wrong per se, but I'd say it is unnecessary and adds more lines to the
> release notes. Unless the goal of the release notes is to list the issues
> we investigated as part of the release, I'd say that going forward we
> should exclude issues marked as "not a problem".
>
> I don't see the need to -1 the RC2 based on the inclusion of ZK-1676,
> though.
>
> -Flavio
>
>
> > On 29 Aug 2016, at 05:22, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
> >
> > OK, I got it. Thanks a lot for the clarification.
> >
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> >
> >> I would say it's acceptable to include 1676 in the release note. IMO we
> >> shouldn't list things in the release notes if they weren't addressed
> (typ
> >> fixed) in that release. However in this case I don't see why it's a very
> >> big deal - if folks are that interested in the issue they could quickly
> see
> >> (by opening the jira) what the resolution was.
> >>
> >> Patrick
> >>
> >> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 8:38 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> rake...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Thanks Patrick, I just referred 3.4.6 release note and I could see
> >> similar
> >>> category, ZOOKEEPER-1599 marked resolution as 'Not A Problem' and
> >> included
> >>> in 3.4.6 release note. Should we follow the same pattern and
> >>> include ZOOKEEPER-1676 also in 3.4.9 release note, please correct me
> if I
> >>> missed anything.
> >>>
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> >>> projectId=12310801&version=12323310
> >>>
> >>> Rakesh
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 8:25 AM, Patrick Hunt 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> >>> rake...@apache.org>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Thanks Flavio for taking the discussion ahead. Thanks Michael for
> >>>> pointing
> >>>>> out these cases.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Looking at release notes:
> >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?p
> >>>>> rojectId=12310801&version=12334700
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>  - [ZOOKEEPER-2396 <https://issues.apache.org/jir
> >>>>> a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2396>]
> >>>>>>>>  - Login object in ZooKeeperSaslClient is static
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9.
> >> Maybe
> >>>>> there
> >>>>>>>> was a mistake on marking the target version as 3.4.9? Should we
> >>> keep
> >>>>> this
> >>>>>>>> in relesae note or remove it?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> It is resolved through a different issue, ZK-2139. I can go either,
> >>>>> including or excluding it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I would wait to see others response.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>  - [ZOOKEEPER-1676 <https://issues.apache.org/jir
> >>>>> a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1676>]
> >>>>>>>>  - C client zookeeper_interest returning ZOK on Connection Loss
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9
> >>> either,
> >>>> as
> >>>>>>>> this is closed as 'not a bug'. I'd expect such not a bug issue be
> >>>>> excluded
> >>>>>>>> in release notes, as it does not provide any useful information,
> >>>> though
> >>>>> I
> >>>>>>>> am not sure what's the standard practice in previous releas

Re: Issues with release notes in 3.4.9 RC2 (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2)

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

OK, I got it. Thanks a lot for the clarification.

Rakesh

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> I would say it's acceptable to include 1676 in the release note. IMO we
> shouldn't list things in the release notes if they weren't addressed (typ
> fixed) in that release. However in this case I don't see why it's a very
> big deal - if folks are that interested in the issue they could quickly see
> (by opening the jira) what the resolution was.
>
> Patrick
>
> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 8:38 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Patrick, I just referred 3.4.6 release note and I could see
> similar
> > category, ZOOKEEPER-1599 marked resolution as 'Not A Problem' and
> included
> > in 3.4.6 release note. Should we follow the same pattern and
> > include ZOOKEEPER-1676 also in 3.4.9 release note, please correct me if I
> > missed anything.
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> > projectId=12310801&version=12323310
> >
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 8:25 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > rake...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks Flavio for taking the discussion ahead. Thanks Michael for
> > > pointing
> > > > out these cases.
> > > >
> > > > >>> Looking at release notes:
> > > > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?p
> > > > rojectId=12310801&version=12334700
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>   - [ZOOKEEPER-2396 <https://issues.apache.org/jir
> > > > a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2396>]
> > > > >>>   - Login object in ZooKeeperSaslClient is static
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>  There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9.
> Maybe
> > > > there
> > > > >>> was a mistake on marking the target version as 3.4.9? Should we
> > keep
> > > > this
> > > > >>> in relesae note or remove it?
> > > >
> > > > >It is resolved through a different issue, ZK-2139. I can go either,
> > > > including or excluding it.
> > > >
> > > > I would wait to see others response.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>   - [ZOOKEEPER-1676 <https://issues.apache.org/jir
> > > > a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1676>]
> > > > >>>   - C client zookeeper_interest returning ZOK on Connection Loss
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>  There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9
> > either,
> > > as
> > > > >>> this is closed as 'not a bug'. I'd expect such not a bug issue be
> > > > excluded
> > > > >>> in release notes, as it does not provide any useful information,
> > > though
> > > > I
> > > > >>> am not sure what's the standard practice in previous releases.
> > > >
> > > > >Agreed, better not to include if we classified as not a problem.
> > > >
> > > > I could see 'HowToRelease' page has specifically mentioned the
> excluded
> > > > categories as "Won' fix" and "Invalid" jira resolution.
> ZOOKEEPER-1676
> > > > comes under 'Not A Problem' category. Perhaps we could revisit the
> > > > classifications and consider more cases like, Not a problem, Cannot
> > > > Reproduce, Not A Bug etc, if everyone thinks so. But I'm not sure how
> > > > updating the excluded category might reflect in our previously
> released
> > > > versions.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Typically I removed the "fixed version" if it's not actually fixed.
> i.e.
> > > "wont fix" means I would clear the "fix version" as part of resolving
> the
> > > issue.
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > >
> > > > Reference:-
> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease
> > page,
> > > > "Note that you need to exclude the won't fix or invalid tickets."
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Rakesh
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Flavio Junqueira 
&g

Re: Issues with release notes in 3.4.9 RC2 (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2)

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks Patrick, I just referred 3.4.6 release note and I could see similar
category, ZOOKEEPER-1599 marked resolution as 'Not A Problem' and included
in 3.4.6 release note. Should we follow the same pattern and
include ZOOKEEPER-1676 also in 3.4.9 release note, please correct me if I
missed anything.

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
projectId=12310801&version=12323310

Rakesh

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 8:25 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Flavio for taking the discussion ahead. Thanks Michael for
> pointing
> > out these cases.
> >
> > >>> Looking at release notes:
> > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?p
> > rojectId=12310801&version=12334700
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>   - [ZOOKEEPER-2396 <https://issues.apache.org/jir
> > a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2396>]
> > >>>   - Login object in ZooKeeperSaslClient is static
> > >>>
> > >>>  There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9. Maybe
> > there
> > >>> was a mistake on marking the target version as 3.4.9? Should we keep
> > this
> > >>> in relesae note or remove it?
> >
> > >It is resolved through a different issue, ZK-2139. I can go either,
> > including or excluding it.
> >
> > I would wait to see others response.
> >
> >
> > >>>
> > >>>   - [ZOOKEEPER-1676 <https://issues.apache.org/jir
> > a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1676>]
> > >>>   - C client zookeeper_interest returning ZOK on Connection Loss
> > >>>
> > >>>  There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9 either,
> as
> > >>> this is closed as 'not a bug'. I'd expect such not a bug issue be
> > excluded
> > >>> in release notes, as it does not provide any useful information,
> though
> > I
> > >>> am not sure what's the standard practice in previous releases.
> >
> > >Agreed, better not to include if we classified as not a problem.
> >
> > I could see 'HowToRelease' page has specifically mentioned the excluded
> > categories as "Won' fix" and "Invalid" jira resolution. ZOOKEEPER-1676
> > comes under 'Not A Problem' category. Perhaps we could revisit the
> > classifications and consider more cases like, Not a problem, Cannot
> > Reproduce, Not A Bug etc, if everyone thinks so. But I'm not sure how
> > updating the excluded category might reflect in our previously released
> > versions.
> >
> >
> Typically I removed the "fixed version" if it's not actually fixed. i.e.
> "wont fix" means I would clear the "fix version" as part of resolving the
> issue.
>
> Patrick
>
>
> > Reference:-
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease page,
> > "Note that you need to exclude the won't fix or invalid tickets."
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Flavio Junqueira 
> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > > On 27 Aug 2016, at 00:16, Michael Han  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Looking at release notes:
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
> > > ctId=12310801&version=12334700
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >   - [ZOOKEEPER-2396 <https://issues.apache.org/jir
> > > a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2396>]
> > > >   - Login object in ZooKeeperSaslClient is static
> > > >
> > > >  There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9. Maybe
> > there
> > > > was a mistake on marking the target version as 3.4.9? Should we keep
> > this
> > > > in relesae note or remove it?
> > >
> > > It is resolved through a different issue, ZK-2139. I can go either,
> > > including or excluding it.
> > >
> > > >
> > > >   - [ZOOKEEPER-1676 <https://issues.apache.org/jir
> > > a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1676>]
> > > >   - C client zookeeper_interest returning ZOK on Connection Loss
> > > >
> > > >  There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9 either,
> as
> > > > this is closed as 'not a bug'. I'd expect such not a bug issue be
> > > excluded
> > > > in release notes, as it does not provide any useful information,
> > th

Re: Issues with release notes in 3.4.9 RC2 (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2)

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks Flavio for taking the discussion ahead. Thanks Michael for pointing
out these cases.

>>> Looking at release notes:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?p
rojectId=12310801&version=12334700
>>>
>>>
>>>   - [ZOOKEEPER-2396 <https://issues.apache.org/jir
a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2396>]
>>>   - Login object in ZooKeeperSaslClient is static
>>>
>>>  There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9. Maybe
there
>>> was a mistake on marking the target version as 3.4.9? Should we keep
this
>>> in relesae note or remove it?

>It is resolved through a different issue, ZK-2139. I can go either,
including or excluding it.

I would wait to see others response.


>>>
>>>   - [ZOOKEEPER-1676 <https://issues.apache.org/jir
a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1676>]
>>>   - C client zookeeper_interest returning ZOK on Connection Loss
>>>
>>>  There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9 either, as
>>> this is closed as 'not a bug'. I'd expect such not a bug issue be
excluded
>>> in release notes, as it does not provide any useful information, though
I
>>> am not sure what's the standard practice in previous releases.

>Agreed, better not to include if we classified as not a problem.

I could see 'HowToRelease' page has specifically mentioned the excluded
categories as "Won' fix" and "Invalid" jira resolution. ZOOKEEPER-1676
comes under 'Not A Problem' category. Perhaps we could revisit the
classifications and consider more cases like, Not a problem, Cannot
Reproduce, Not A Bug etc, if everyone thinks so. But I'm not sure how
updating the excluded category might reflect in our previously released
versions.

Reference:-
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease page,
"Note that you need to exclude the won't fix or invalid tickets."

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Flavio Junqueira  wrote:

>
> > On 27 Aug 2016, at 00:16, Michael Han  wrote:
> >
> > Looking at release notes:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
> ctId=12310801&version=12334700
> >
> >
> >   - [ZOOKEEPER-2396 <https://issues.apache.org/jir
> a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2396>]
> >   - Login object in ZooKeeperSaslClient is static
> >
> >  There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9. Maybe there
> > was a mistake on marking the target version as 3.4.9? Should we keep this
> > in relesae note or remove it?
>
> It is resolved through a different issue, ZK-2139. I can go either,
> including or excluding it.
>
> >
> >   - [ZOOKEEPER-1676 <https://issues.apache.org/jir
> a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1676>]
> >   - C client zookeeper_interest returning ZOK on Connection Loss
> >
> >  There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9 either, as
> > this is closed as 'not a bug'. I'd expect such not a bug issue be
> excluded
> > in release notes, as it does not provide any useful information, though I
> > am not sure what's the standard practice in previous releases.
>
> Agreed, better not to include if we classified as not a problem.
>
> -Flavio
>
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Abraham Fine 
> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 (non-binding)
> >>
> >> shasum and md5sum are valid. PGP signature is valid.
> >>
> >> Java unit tests pass and was able to successfully test against a 3
> server
> >> ensemble.
> >>
> >> Abe
> >>
> >>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 4:20 PM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> +1 xsum/sig are valid. RAT ran clean. I was able to compile the code
> and
> >>> successfully put a few ensemble sizes through their paces.
> >>>
> >>> fwiw I also did a "diff" btw 3.4.8 release artifact and this rc. There
> >> were
> >>> a number of changed files, obviously. However I did not notice any
> >> missing
> >>> files, as we've seen with the previous rcs in this release candidate
> >> line.
> >>> afaict this artifact has all the right contents - i.e. similar to
> >> previous
> >>> releases.
> >>>
> >>> Patrick
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 2:24 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> >> rake...@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> This is the third release candidate for 3.4.9. This candidate removes
> >> the
> >>>> extra

[VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

This is the third release candidate for 3.4.9. This candidate removes the
extra *.asc files found in the
second candidate.

This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.9. It fixes 21 issues, including
issues that affect ACL cache
in DataTree never removes entries, prevent multiple init of login object in
each ZKSaslClient instance,
ZK service becomes unavailable when leader fails to write transaction log,
upgrade netty version due
to security vulnerability (CVE-2014-3488) and others.

The full release notes are available at:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310801&version=12334700

*** Please download, test and vote by August 30th 2016, 23:59 UTC+0. ***

Source files:
http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.9-candidate-2

Maven staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.9

The tag to be voted upon:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/zookeeper/tags/release-3.4.9-rc2

ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS

Should we release this candidate?

Thanks,
Rakesh

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 1

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks for the advice, Chris. I'll start cutting another release candidate
now.

Rakesh

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Chris Nauroth 
wrote:

> You’re right.  It looks like dist-maven/zookeeper-3.4.8.pom was missing
> the signature file.  There is nothing we can do about that retroactively
> now, but we can update the release instructions for greater clarity on
> future releases.
>
> Yes, I think it would be ideal to cut another release candidate.
>
> --Chris Nauroth
>
> On 8/22/16, 7:57 PM, "Rakesh Radhakrishnan" 
> wrote:
>
> Thanks Chris for spotting the inconsistency.
>
> I could see 3.4.8 release misses signing of *.pom.asc file. I think
> this is
> excluded by mistake, I will include this also in my next release
> candidate
> and remove unwanted signing of other files. Shall I cut another release
> candidate ?
>
> It would be good to update "HowToRelease" section about the dist-maven
> signing part.
>
> Thanks,
> Rakesh
>
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 5:07 AM, Chris Nauroth <
> cnaur...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello Rakesh,
> >
> > Thank you for your hard work on this release.  With release
> candidate 1, I
> > can get a successful run of "ant clean test-core-cppunit".
> >
> > Unfortunately, I spotted another inconsistency.  In the dist-maven
> > directory, there are signature files (*.asc) for not only the jar
> files,
> > but also the md5 and sha1 files.  See below for a listing of the
> dist-maven
> > directory in 3.4.8 vs. 3.4.9 RC1.  I would prefer to see another
> release
> > candidate to correct this so that the contents are consistent across
> > releases, especially within a stable maintenance line like 3.4.  If
> > administrators have coded scripts to automate validation of
> signatures
> > within ZooKeeper releases, then there is a risk that the extra files
> could
> > confuse that automation.
> >
> > This part of the release process is step 2b in the "Building"
> section.
> > Perhaps this can be made clearer.  I don’t think it currently
> mentions how
> > the md5 and sha1 files under dist-maven work.
> >
> >
> >
> > > ll zookeeper-3.4.8/dist-maven/*.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Feb  5  2016 zookeeper-3.4.8/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.8.jar.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Feb  5  2016 zookeeper-3.4.8/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.8-javadoc.jar.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Feb  5  2016 zookeeper-3.4.8/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.8-sources.jar.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Feb  5  2016 zookeeper-3.4.8/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.8-tests.jar.asc
> >
> > > ll zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/*.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:36 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.9.jar.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:36 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.9.jar.md5.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:36 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.9.jar.sha1.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:37 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.9-javadoc.jar.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:37 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.9-javadoc.jar.md5.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:37 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.9-javadoc.jar.sha1.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:35 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.9.pom.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:35 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.9.pom.md5.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:36 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.9.pom.sha1.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:37 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.9-sources.jar.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:37 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.9-sources.jar.md5.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:37 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.9-sources.jar.sha1.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:36 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.9-tests.jar.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:36 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zookeeper-3.4.9-tests.jar.md5.asc
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:36 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> > zook

Re: Help needed to commit a couple of patches related to flaky tests

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks Michael for the reminder. I will take a look at these issues by this
week.

Rakesh

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 3:06 AM, Michael Han  wrote:

> Hi committers,
>
> I'd like get some help to finalize and commit these patches that related to
> flaky tests. These patches are ready to be committed as they are reviewed
> and stress tested. Get them in will hopefully improve success rates of
> nightly builds and pre-commit builds, as well as making the builds trending
> graph looks nicer :)
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2080 (ReconfigRecoveryTest
> fails intermittently)
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2152 (Intermittent failure
> in TestReconfig.cc)
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2508 (Many ZooKeeper tests
> are flaky because they proceed with zk operation without connecting to
> ZooKeeper server.)
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2502 (Flaky Test:
> org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.CnxManagerTest.
> testCnxFromFutureVersion.).
>
> --
> Cheers
> Michael.
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 1

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks Chris for spotting the inconsistency.

I could see 3.4.8 release misses signing of *.pom.asc file. I think this is
excluded by mistake, I will include this also in my next release candidate
and remove unwanted signing of other files. Shall I cut another release
candidate ?

It would be good to update "HowToRelease" section about the dist-maven
signing part.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 5:07 AM, Chris Nauroth 
wrote:

> Hello Rakesh,
>
> Thank you for your hard work on this release.  With release candidate 1, I
> can get a successful run of "ant clean test-core-cppunit".
>
> Unfortunately, I spotted another inconsistency.  In the dist-maven
> directory, there are signature files (*.asc) for not only the jar files,
> but also the md5 and sha1 files.  See below for a listing of the dist-maven
> directory in 3.4.8 vs. 3.4.9 RC1.  I would prefer to see another release
> candidate to correct this so that the contents are consistent across
> releases, especially within a stable maintenance line like 3.4.  If
> administrators have coded scripts to automate validation of signatures
> within ZooKeeper releases, then there is a risk that the extra files could
> confuse that automation.
>
> This part of the release process is step 2b in the "Building" section.
> Perhaps this can be made clearer.  I don’t think it currently mentions how
> the md5 and sha1 files under dist-maven work.
>
>
>
> > ll zookeeper-3.4.8/dist-maven/*.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Feb  5  2016 zookeeper-3.4.8/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.8.jar.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Feb  5  2016 zookeeper-3.4.8/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.8-javadoc.jar.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Feb  5  2016 zookeeper-3.4.8/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.8-sources.jar.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Feb  5  2016 zookeeper-3.4.8/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.8-tests.jar.asc
>
> > ll zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/*.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:36 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9.jar.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:36 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9.jar.md5.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:36 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9.jar.sha1.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:37 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9-javadoc.jar.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:37 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9-javadoc.jar.md5.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:37 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9-javadoc.jar.sha1.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:35 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9.pom.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:35 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9.pom.md5.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:36 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9.pom.sha1.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:37 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9-sources.jar.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:37 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9-sources.jar.md5.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:37 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9-sources.jar.sha1.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:36 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9-tests.jar.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:36 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9-tests.jar.md5.asc
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 cnauroth 819 Aug 22 14:36 zookeeper-3.4.9/dist-maven/
> zookeeper-3.4.9-tests.jar.sha1.asc
>
> --Chris Nauroth
>
> On 8/22/16, 3:20 PM, "Rakesh Radhakrishnan"  wrote:
>
> This is the second release candidate for 3.4.9. This candidate fixes
> the
> autotools issue found in
> the first candidate.
>
> This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.9. It fixes 21 issues,
> including
> issues that affect ACL cache
> in DataTree never removes entries, prevent multiple init of login
> object in
> each ZKSaslClient instance,
> ZK service becomes unavailable when leader fails to write transaction
> log,
> upgrade netty version due
> to security vulnerability (CVE-2014-3488) and others.
>
> The full release notes are available at:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> projectId=12310801&version=12334700
>
> *** Please download, test and vote by August 30th 2016, 23:59 UTC+0.
> ***
>
> Source files:
> http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.9-candidate-1
>
> Maven staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/
> apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.9
>
> The tag to be voted upon:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/zookeeper/tags/release-3.4.9-rc1
>
> ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
>
> Should we release this candidate?
>
> --Rakesh
>
>
>

[VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 1

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

This is the second release candidate for 3.4.9. This candidate fixes the
autotools issue found in
the first candidate.

This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.9. It fixes 21 issues, including
issues that affect ACL cache
in DataTree never removes entries, prevent multiple init of login object in
each ZKSaslClient instance,
ZK service becomes unavailable when leader fails to write transaction log,
upgrade netty version due
to security vulnerability (CVE-2014-3488) and others.

The full release notes are available at:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310801&version=12334700

*** Please download, test and vote by August 30th 2016, 23:59 UTC+0. ***

Source files:
http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.9-candidate-1

Maven staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.9

The tag to be voted upon:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/zookeeper/tags/release-3.4.9-rc1

ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS

Should we release this candidate?

--Rakesh

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

OK, I'll do necessary steps again and come up with rc1, thanks.

Rakesh

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Chris Nauroth 
wrote:

> Rakesh, thank you for figuring this out.  Lack of running the "test"
> target would explain this.
>
> IMO, you will need to tag again, because the RC number is part of the tag.
>
> Also, I don’t believe you can skip step 8 under Building.  Even though
> code hasn’t changed, there are still reasons that the rebuilt jar file can
> be different from what you staged into Nexus the first time, due to things
> like file timestamps.  We want the artifact in the tarball to match the
> artifact in Nexus, so I think it’s safer to repeat step 8 for this RC.
>
> --Chris Nauroth
>
> On 8/22/16, 11:39 AM, "Rakesh Radhakrishnan" 
> wrote:
>
> IIUC, you are advising me to skip the 8th step in the Building section
> and
> just do 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9,  am I correct? Also, tagging step
> is not
> required, 11th step.
>
> Thanks,
> Rakesh
>
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Patrick Hunt 
> wrote:
>
> > You'll need to go through all the "how to release" steps again (the
> build
> > steps, not the branching, etc...) and create an "rc1" for review.
> Don't try
> > to massage the jars/tars/etc... just re-run the process to create the
> > .tar.gz and start a new voting thread.
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > rakeshr.apa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I faced couple of issues in my local env while preparing the
> release and
> > > done two time svn checkouts. Unfortunately, I had created the
> tarball
> > from
> > > my second one without invoking "test" target and just did  $ant
> package
> > > tar, which has created this issue.
> > >
> > > rakesh@rakesh-Inspiron-3543:~/Rakesh/branch-3.4/src/c$ autoreconf
> > > --version
> > > autoreconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.69
> > >
> > > Now, I've built "ant test package tar" in my checkout branch, it
> has
> > > created the tarball perfectly with all these missing files.
> > >
> > > Rakesh
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Patrick Hunt 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Rakesh - part of running step 1 of the "building" (ant test
> package
> > tar)
> > > is
> > > > that you should end up with (notice this is in the build
> directory):
> > > >
> > > > phunt@phunt-MBP13:~/dev/zookeeper-br34[branch-3.4]$ ls
> > > > build/zookeeper-3.4.9/src/c/
> > > > ChangeLog   NOTICE.txt c-doc.Doxyfile configure.ac
>  missing
> > > > Cli.vcproj README compile depcomp src/
> > > > INSTALL acinclude.m4   config.guess   generated/ tests/
> > > > LICENSE aclocal.m4 config.h.in include/
>  zookeeper.sln
> > > > Makefile.am aminclude.am   config.sub install-sh
> > > > zookeeper.vcproj
> > > > Makefile.in autom4te.cache/ configure   ltmain.sh
> > > >
> > > > and those files should make it into the release artifact .tar.gz
> > > >
> > > > Is that not happening for you?
> > > >
> > > > what version of autotools do you have? I have:
> > > >
> > > > phunt@phunt-MBP13:~/dev/zookeeper-br34[branch-3.4]$ autoreconf
> > --version
> > > > autoreconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.69
> > > >
> > > > Patrick
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 2:25 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > > rake...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks Chris, Michael for the observations and advice.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, I also feel that the problem is due to missing
> 'install-sh' in
> > the
> > > > > tarball.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've compared 3.4.9 tarball with previous version and found the
> > > following
> > > > > files are missing in "http://people.apache.org/~rak
> > > > > eshr/zookeeper-3.4.9-candidate-0/zookeeper-3.4.9.tar.gz"
> > > > >
> &

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

IIUC, you are advising me to skip the 8th step in the Building section and
just do 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9,  am I correct? Also, tagging step is not
required, 11th step.

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> You'll need to go through all the "how to release" steps again (the build
> steps, not the branching, etc...) and create an "rc1" for review. Don't try
> to massage the jars/tars/etc... just re-run the process to create the
> .tar.gz and start a new voting thread.
>
> Patrick
>
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> rakeshr.apa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I faced couple of issues in my local env while preparing the release and
> > done two time svn checkouts. Unfortunately, I had created the tarball
> from
> > my second one without invoking "test" target and just did  $ant package
> > tar, which has created this issue.
> >
> > rakesh@rakesh-Inspiron-3543:~/Rakesh/branch-3.4/src/c$ autoreconf
> > --version
> > autoreconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.69
> >
> > Now, I've built "ant test package tar" in my checkout branch, it has
> > created the tarball perfectly with all these missing files.
> >
> > Rakesh
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> >
> > > Rakesh - part of running step 1 of the "building" (ant test package
> tar)
> > is
> > > that you should end up with (notice this is in the build directory):
> > >
> > > phunt@phunt-MBP13:~/dev/zookeeper-br34[branch-3.4]$ ls
> > > build/zookeeper-3.4.9/src/c/
> > > ChangeLog   NOTICE.txt c-doc.Doxyfile configure.ac   missing
> > > Cli.vcproj README compile depcomp src/
> > > INSTALL acinclude.m4   config.guess   generated/ tests/
> > > LICENSE aclocal.m4 config.h.in include/   zookeeper.sln
> > > Makefile.am aminclude.am   config.sub install-sh
> > > zookeeper.vcproj
> > > Makefile.in autom4te.cache/ configure   ltmain.sh
> > >
> > > and those files should make it into the release artifact .tar.gz
> > >
> > > Is that not happening for you?
> > >
> > > what version of autotools do you have? I have:
> > >
> > > phunt@phunt-MBP13:~/dev/zookeeper-br34[branch-3.4]$ autoreconf
> --version
> > > autoreconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.69
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 2:25 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> > rake...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks Chris, Michael for the observations and advice.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I also feel that the problem is due to missing 'install-sh' in
> the
> > > > tarball.
> > > >
> > > > I've compared 3.4.9 tarball with previous version and found the
> > following
> > > > files are missing in "http://people.apache.org/~rak
> > > > eshr/zookeeper-3.4.9-candidate-0/zookeeper-3.4.9.tar.gz"
> > > >
> > > > $ZK_HOME/src/c/tests
> > > > compile
> > > > config.guess
> > > > config.h.in
> > > > config.sub
> > > > depcomp
> > > > install-sh
> > > > Makefile.in
> > > > missing
> > > >
> > > > Since there is no code changes to resolve this, how about replace
> only
> > > > existing release artifacts(tarball, other files) in my public shared
> > > > location by including these files and keeps other items as it is
> > (Source
> > > > files, Maven staging repo, tag) ? Its just a suggestion, I agree to
> > > follow
> > > > the standard procedures to handle this situation.
> > > >
> > > > --Rakesh
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Chris Nauroth <
> > > cnaur...@hortonworks.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I was able to make it work by running:
> > > > >
> > > > > libtoolize --force
> > > > > aclocal
> > > > > autoheader
> > > > > automake --force-missing --add-missing
> > > > > autoconf
> > > > >
> > > > > I’ve never had to do this for prior releases though.  This is the
> > same
> > > VM
> > > > > I’ve used repeatedly for ZooKeeper release verification.  It’s
> > > > CentOS 7
> > > > > and autoconf 2.69.
&

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

I faced couple of issues in my local env while preparing the release and
done two time svn checkouts. Unfortunately, I had created the tarball from
my second one without invoking "test" target and just did  $ant package
tar, which has created this issue.

rakesh@rakesh-Inspiron-3543:~/Rakesh/branch-3.4/src/c$ autoreconf --version
autoreconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.69

Now, I've built "ant test package tar" in my checkout branch, it has
created the tarball perfectly with all these missing files.

Rakesh

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> Rakesh - part of running step 1 of the "building" (ant test package tar) is
> that you should end up with (notice this is in the build directory):
>
> phunt@phunt-MBP13:~/dev/zookeeper-br34[branch-3.4]$ ls
> build/zookeeper-3.4.9/src/c/
> ChangeLog   NOTICE.txt c-doc.Doxyfile configure.ac   missing
> Cli.vcproj README compile depcomp src/
> INSTALL acinclude.m4   config.guess   generated/ tests/
> LICENSE aclocal.m4 config.h.in include/   zookeeper.sln
> Makefile.am aminclude.am   config.sub install-sh
> zookeeper.vcproj
> Makefile.in autom4te.cache/ configure   ltmain.sh
>
> and those files should make it into the release artifact .tar.gz
>
> Is that not happening for you?
>
> what version of autotools do you have? I have:
>
> phunt@phunt-MBP13:~/dev/zookeeper-br34[branch-3.4]$ autoreconf --version
> autoreconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.69
>
> Patrick
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 2:25 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Chris, Michael for the observations and advice.
> >
> > Yes, I also feel that the problem is due to missing 'install-sh' in the
> > tarball.
> >
> > I've compared 3.4.9 tarball with previous version and found the following
> > files are missing in "http://people.apache.org/~rak
> > eshr/zookeeper-3.4.9-candidate-0/zookeeper-3.4.9.tar.gz"
> >
> > $ZK_HOME/src/c/tests
> > compile
> > config.guess
> > config.h.in
> > config.sub
> > depcomp
> > install-sh
> > Makefile.in
> > missing
> >
> > Since there is no code changes to resolve this, how about replace only
> > existing release artifacts(tarball, other files) in my public shared
> > location by including these files and keeps other items as it is (Source
> > files, Maven staging repo, tag) ? Its just a suggestion, I agree to
> follow
> > the standard procedures to handle this situation.
> >
> > --Rakesh
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Chris Nauroth <
> cnaur...@hortonworks.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I was able to make it work by running:
> > >
> > > libtoolize --force
> > > aclocal
> > > autoheader
> > > automake --force-missing --add-missing
> > > autoconf
> > >
> > > I’ve never had to do this for prior releases though.  This is the same
> VM
> > > I’ve used repeatedly for ZooKeeper release verification.  It’s
> > CentOS 7
> > > and autoconf 2.69.
> > >
> > > The core of the issue seems to be that install-sh is not present in
> this
> > > tarball, even though that file was present in earlier release tarballs.
> > > The autoreconf command triggered by our build doesn’t seem to
> regenerate
> > it
> > > for me.  Running the automake command above forces it into place by
> > > symlinking to a locally installed copy.
> > >
> > > I’ll proceed with more validation of the release tomorrow.  I’ll
> consider
> > > changing my vote if it turns out there is no user-facing impact.
> Still,
> > I
> > > wonder why this particular release behaves differently.
> > >
> > > --Chris Nauroth
> > >
> > > On 8/21/16, 12:57 PM, "Michael Han"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Chris,
> > >
> > > I don't see the error you got. All C tests passed on Ubuntu, and
> all
> > > configuration and compilation stage passed on OSX (on mac the
> linker
> > > error
> > > is a known issue.). What I did:
> > >
> > > * curl -O
> > > http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.9-candidate-
> > > 0/zookeeper-3.4.9.tar.gz
> > > * tar -xvzf zookeeper-3.4.9.tar.gz
> > > * cd zookeeper-3.4.9
> > > * ant clean test-core-cppunit
> > >
> > > The error you got seems not so uncommon - this might help:
> > > http://blog.gaku.net/autoconf/
> > >
> > >
> > > 

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks Chris, Michael for the observations and advice.

Yes, I also feel that the problem is due to missing 'install-sh' in the
tarball.

I've compared 3.4.9 tarball with previous version and found the following
files are missing in "http://people.apache.org/~rak
eshr/zookeeper-3.4.9-candidate-0/zookeeper-3.4.9.tar.gz"

$ZK_HOME/src/c/tests
compile
config.guess
config.h.in
config.sub
depcomp
install-sh
Makefile.in
missing

Since there is no code changes to resolve this, how about replace only
existing release artifacts(tarball, other files) in my public shared
location by including these files and keeps other items as it is (Source
files, Maven staging repo, tag) ? Its just a suggestion, I agree to follow
the standard procedures to handle this situation.

--Rakesh

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Chris Nauroth 
wrote:

> I was able to make it work by running:
>
> libtoolize --force
> aclocal
> autoheader
> automake --force-missing --add-missing
> autoconf
>
> I’ve never had to do this for prior releases though.  This is the same VM
> I’ve used repeatedly for ZooKeeper release verification.  It’s CentOS 7
> and autoconf 2.69.
>
> The core of the issue seems to be that install-sh is not present in this
> tarball, even though that file was present in earlier release tarballs.
> The autoreconf command triggered by our build doesn’t seem to regenerate it
> for me.  Running the automake command above forces it into place by
> symlinking to a locally installed copy.
>
> I’ll proceed with more validation of the release tomorrow.  I’ll consider
> changing my vote if it turns out there is no user-facing impact.  Still, I
> wonder why this particular release behaves differently.
>
> --Chris Nauroth
>
> On 8/21/16, 12:57 PM, "Michael Han"  wrote:
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> I don't see the error you got. All C tests passed on Ubuntu, and all
> configuration and compilation stage passed on OSX (on mac the linker
> error
> is a known issue.). What I did:
>
> * curl -O
> http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.9-candidate-
> 0/zookeeper-3.4.9.tar.gz
> * tar -xvzf zookeeper-3.4.9.tar.gz
> * cd zookeeper-3.4.9
> * ant clean test-core-cppunit
>
> The error you got seems not so uncommon - this might help:
> http://blog.gaku.net/autoconf/
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Chris Nauroth <
> cnaur...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> > -1 (binding)
> >
> > I haven't been able to run "ant clean test-core-cppunit" to build the
> > native code and run tests.  It fails in the
> "create-cppunit-configure"
> > target with the error shown below.
> >
> > My first theory was that something had gone wrong in my own build
> > environment, but I've confirmed that I can run "ant clean
> > test-core-cppunit" for the 3.4.8 release tarball and also for a git
> > checkout of branch-3.4.  That leads me to conclude that something is
> wrong
> > in the 3.4.9 release tarball and not my environment.
> >
> > I'd appreciate if someone else could try it and report their results.
> >
> >
> >
> > create-cppunit-configure:
> > [mkdir] Created dir: /home/cnauroth/zookeeper-3.4.
> > 9/build/test/test-cppunit
> >  [exec] checking for doxygen... no
> >  [exec] checking for perl... /usr/bin/perl
>     >  [exec] checking for dot... no
> >  [exec] configure: error: cannot find install-sh, install.sh, or
> > shtool in "/home/cnauroth/zookeeper-3.4.9/src/c"
> > "/home/cnauroth/zookeeper-3.4.9/src/c/.."
> "/home/cnauroth/zookeeper-3.4.
> > 9/src/c/../.."
> >
> > --Chris Nauroth
> >
> > On 8/18/16, 9:24 AM, "Rakesh Radhakrishnan" 
> wrote:
> >
> > This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.9. It fixes 21 issues,
> > including
> > issues that affect ACL cache
> > in DataTree never removes entries, prevent multiple init of login
> > object in
> > each ZKSaslClient instance,
> > ZK service becomes unavailable when leader fails to write
> transaction
> > log,
> > upgrade netty version due
> > to security vulnerability (CVE-2014-3488) and others.
> >
> > The full release notes are available at:
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> > projectId=12310801&version=12334700
> >

[VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 0

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.9. It fixes 21 issues, including
issues that affect ACL cache
in DataTree never removes entries, prevent multiple init of login object in
each ZKSaslClient instance,
ZK service becomes unavailable when leader fails to write transaction log,
upgrade netty version due
to security vulnerability (CVE-2014-3488) and others.

The full release notes are available at:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
projectId=12310801&version=12334700

*** Please download, test and vote by August 26th 2016, 23:59 UTC+0. ***

Source files:
http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.9-candidate-0

Maven staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/
apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.9

The tag to be voted upon:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/zookeeper/tags/release-3.4.9-rc0

ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS

Should we release this candidate?


Rakesh

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.9 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

On a second look, I think I need to update the existing 'releasenotes.html'
details by manually replace the contents with the jira for all the versions
as the page formatting is different for the existing content. Shall I
convert the existing content in this file to the new format ? Am I missing
anything here?

Rakesh

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> It seems, https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/blob/branch-
> 3.4/docs/releasenotes.html beginning with "ZooKeeper 3.4.5 Release
> Notes". I hope I need to append the details of 3.4.6, 3.4.7, 3.4.8 first
> and then add our current 3.4.9 release notes, isn't it?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Rakesh
>
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 8:13 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Patrick and Chris for quickly resolving this. I will continue with
>> the release procedures.
>>
>> Rakesh
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 4:50 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>>
>>> Great, thanks Chris!
>>>
>>> Patrick
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Chris Nauroth >> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I just committed the ZOOKEEPER-2514 patch.  Patrick, thank you for the
>>>> quick turnaround.  Rakesh, I think you’re all set to proceed with release
>>>> notes for the 3.4.9 release candidate.
>>>>
>>>> --Chris Nauroth
>>>>
>>>> On 8/16/16, 2:52 PM, "Patrick Hunt"  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Rakesh pointed out that the current "how to release" docs no longer
>>>> are
>>>> correct for branch-3.4 as in branch-3.5 and later we updated the
>>>> release
>>>> notes creation process to simplify it. Used to be very manual, in
>>>> 3.5+ we
>>>> moved to using the HTML available from Jira. I've created the
>>>> following
>>>> JIRA to backport that change to branch 3.4. After this patch is
>>>> applied the
>>>> RM process for release notes creation in 3.4 is consistent with the
>>>> "how to
>>>> release" documentation available on the wiki.
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2514
>>>>
>>>> Chris would you be able to take a look/review as well? That would
>>>> help to
>>>> unstick Rakesh with 3.4.9 (although he can review/commit as well
>>>> but given
>>>> the timezone diff...)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Patrick
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Chris Nauroth <
>>>> cnaur...@hortonworks.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > +1 for the plan.  Rakesh, thank you for working on the 3.4.9
>>>> release.
>>>> >
>>>> > --Chris Nauroth
>>>> >
>>>> > On 8/15/16, 7:43 AM, "Rakesh Radhakrishnan" 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi All,
>>>> >
>>>> > I think we have given enough time to push issues into 3.4.9
>>>> version
>>>> > release. I'm planning to start looking at the jira issues
>>>> currently
>>>> > marked
>>>> > for 3.4.9 and move into 3.4.10. I'd like to propose a
>>>> deadline,
>>>> > sometime
>>>> > around *Tuesday, 16 August 2016 PST* to hear from you. Kindly
>>>> > requesting
>>>> > everyone to look at the open jira issues marked for 3.4.9 and
>>>> let me
>>>> > know
>>>> > your thoughts asap. Thanks!
>>>> >
>>>> > I personally feel, only ZOOKEEPER-2383 blocker could be good
>>>> candidate
>>>> > for
>>>> > this version. Please feel free to add your inputs and help me
>>>> to take a
>>>> > decision for this jira.
>>>> >
>>>> > Please find the open issues here, https://goo.gl/SEliwm
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks,
>>>> > Rakesh
>>>> >
>>>> > On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
>>>> > rake...@apache.org>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> 

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.9 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

It seems,
https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/blob/branch-3.4/docs/releasenotes.html
beginning with "ZooKeeper 3.4.5 Release Notes". I hope I need to append the
details of 3.4.6, 3.4.7, 3.4.8 first and then add our current 3.4.9 release
notes, isn't it?


Thanks,
Rakesh

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 8:13 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> Thanks Patrick and Chris for quickly resolving this. I will continue with
> the release procedures.
>
> Rakesh
>
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 4:50 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>
>> Great, thanks Chris!
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Chris Nauroth 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I just committed the ZOOKEEPER-2514 patch.  Patrick, thank you for the
>>> quick turnaround.  Rakesh, I think you’re all set to proceed with release
>>> notes for the 3.4.9 release candidate.
>>>
>>> --Chris Nauroth
>>>
>>> On 8/16/16, 2:52 PM, "Patrick Hunt"  wrote:
>>>
>>> Rakesh pointed out that the current "how to release" docs no longer
>>> are
>>> correct for branch-3.4 as in branch-3.5 and later we updated the
>>> release
>>> notes creation process to simplify it. Used to be very manual, in
>>> 3.5+ we
>>> moved to using the HTML available from Jira. I've created the
>>> following
>>> JIRA to backport that change to branch 3.4. After this patch is
>>> applied the
>>> RM process for release notes creation in 3.4 is consistent with the
>>> "how to
>>> release" documentation available on the wiki.
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2514
>>>
>>> Chris would you be able to take a look/review as well? That would
>>> help to
>>> unstick Rakesh with 3.4.9 (although he can review/commit as well but
>>> given
>>> the timezone diff...)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Patrick
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Chris Nauroth <
>>> cnaur...@hortonworks.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > +1 for the plan.  Rakesh, thank you for working on the 3.4.9
>>> release.
>>> >
>>> > --Chris Nauroth
>>> >
>>> > On 8/15/16, 7:43 AM, "Rakesh Radhakrishnan" 
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi All,
>>> >
>>> > I think we have given enough time to push issues into 3.4.9
>>> version
>>> > release. I'm planning to start looking at the jira issues
>>> currently
>>> > marked
>>> > for 3.4.9 and move into 3.4.10. I'd like to propose a deadline,
>>> > sometime
>>> > around *Tuesday, 16 August 2016 PST* to hear from you. Kindly
>>> > requesting
>>> > everyone to look at the open jira issues marked for 3.4.9 and
>>> let me
>>> > know
>>> > your thoughts asap. Thanks!
>>> >
>>> > I personally feel, only ZOOKEEPER-2383 blocker could be good
>>> candidate
>>> > for
>>> > this version. Please feel free to add your inputs and help me
>>> to take a
>>> > decision for this jira.
>>> >
>>> > Please find the open issues here, https://goo.gl/SEliwm
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Rakesh
>>> >
>>> > On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
>>> > rake...@apache.org>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Hi All,
>>> > >
>>> > > (1) ZK-2383 -> Attached patch and the bug reporter has shown
>>> > interests to
>>> > > review/test the available patch. @Flavio, @Patrick, do you
>>> have some
>>> > cycles
>>> > > to review the proposed patch. Welcome others input as well.
>>> Thanks!
>>> > >
>>> > > (2) I believe we are very close to finish ZK-2247, waiting
>>> for the
>>> > final
>>> > > reviews and commit.
>>> > >
>>> > > (3) I'd love to include ZK-2355 also. It looks like the fix
>>> is good,
>>> > I've
>>> &

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.9 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Thanks Patrick and Chris for quickly resolving this. I will continue with
the release procedures.

Rakesh

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 4:50 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:

> Great, thanks Chris!
>
> Patrick
>
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Chris Nauroth 
> wrote:
>
>> I just committed the ZOOKEEPER-2514 patch.  Patrick, thank you for the
>> quick turnaround.  Rakesh, I think you’re all set to proceed with release
>> notes for the 3.4.9 release candidate.
>>
>> --Chris Nauroth
>>
>> On 8/16/16, 2:52 PM, "Patrick Hunt"  wrote:
>>
>> Rakesh pointed out that the current "how to release" docs no longer
>> are
>> correct for branch-3.4 as in branch-3.5 and later we updated the
>> release
>> notes creation process to simplify it. Used to be very manual, in
>> 3.5+ we
>> moved to using the HTML available from Jira. I've created the
>> following
>> JIRA to backport that change to branch 3.4. After this patch is
>> applied the
>> RM process for release notes creation in 3.4 is consistent with the
>> "how to
>> release" documentation available on the wiki.
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2514
>>
>> Chris would you be able to take a look/review as well? That would
>> help to
>> unstick Rakesh with 3.4.9 (although he can review/commit as well but
>> given
>> the timezone diff...)
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Chris Nauroth <
>> cnaur...@hortonworks.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > +1 for the plan.  Rakesh, thank you for working on the 3.4.9
>> release.
>> >
>> > --Chris Nauroth
>> >
>> > On 8/15/16, 7:43 AM, "Rakesh Radhakrishnan" 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > I think we have given enough time to push issues into 3.4.9
>> version
>> > release. I'm planning to start looking at the jira issues
>> currently
>> > marked
>> > for 3.4.9 and move into 3.4.10. I'd like to propose a deadline,
>> > sometime
>> > around *Tuesday, 16 August 2016 PST* to hear from you. Kindly
>> > requesting
>> > everyone to look at the open jira issues marked for 3.4.9 and
>> let me
>> > know
>> > your thoughts asap. Thanks!
>> >
>> > I personally feel, only ZOOKEEPER-2383 blocker could be good
>> candidate
>> > for
>> > this version. Please feel free to add your inputs and help me
>> to take a
>> > decision for this jira.
>> >
>> > Please find the open issues here, https://goo.gl/SEliwm
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Rakesh
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
>> > rake...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi All,
>> > >
>> > > (1) ZK-2383 -> Attached patch and the bug reporter has shown
>> > interests to
>> > > review/test the available patch. @Flavio, @Patrick, do you
>> have some
>> > cycles
>> > > to review the proposed patch. Welcome others input as well.
>> Thanks!
>> >     >
>> > > (2) I believe we are very close to finish ZK-2247, waiting
>> for the
>> > final
>> > > reviews and commit.
>> > >
>> > > (3) I'd love to include ZK-2355 also. It looks like the fix
>> is good,
>> > I've
>> > > added few comments. Perhaps, will wait to see feedback from
>> others.
>> > >
>> > > Kindly requesting everyone to look at your issues marked for
>> 3.4.9
>> > and
>> > > push these asap or can be pushed out to 3.4.10.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Rakesh
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 2:49 AM, Patrick Hunt <
>> ph...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan
>> > >>  wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> > >

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.9 release discussion

[Rakesh Radhakrishnan]

Hi All,

I think we have given enough time to push issues into 3.4.9 version
release. I'm planning to start looking at the jira issues currently marked
for 3.4.9 and move into 3.4.10. I'd like to propose a deadline, sometime
around *Tuesday, 16 August 2016 PST* to hear from you. Kindly requesting
everyone to look at the open jira issues marked for 3.4.9 and let me know
your thoughts asap. Thanks!

I personally feel, only ZOOKEEPER-2383 blocker could be good candidate for
this version. Please feel free to add your inputs and help me to take a
decision for this jira.

Please find the open issues here, https://goo.gl/SEliwm

Thanks,
Rakesh

On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> (1) ZK-2383 -> Attached patch and the bug reporter has shown interests to
> review/test the available patch. @Flavio, @Patrick, do you have some cycles
> to review the proposed patch. Welcome others input as well. Thanks!
>
> (2) I believe we are very close to finish ZK-2247, waiting for the final
> reviews and commit.
>
> (3) I'd love to include ZK-2355 also. It looks like the fix is good, I've
> added few comments. Perhaps, will wait to see feedback from others.
>
> Kindly requesting everyone to look at your issues marked for 3.4.9 and
> push these asap or can be pushed out to 3.4.10.
>
> Thanks,
> Rakesh
>
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 2:49 AM, Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan
>>  wrote:
>> >
>> > >>>>>ZK-1045 is a major change and I suggest we give time for folks to
>> try
>> > it out before cutting a release candidate. Ideally, we check it in and
>> give
>> > a few weeks until we cut a release candidate.
>> >
>> > Agreed, will try to push ZK-1045 in asap. Michael and myself is working
>> > closely to finish the following set of open points. Hopefully by next
>> week
>> > we will be able to complete the identified tasks, then will post updated
>> > patch and test report. I would appreciate review
>> > comments/questions/feedback from others.
>> >
>>
>> I am taking another pass at this next.
>>
>> > Pending tasks:-
>> > 1) support authorization in sasl.
>> > 2) few minor log improvements are open.
>> > 3) system testing and preparing report.
>> > 4) feature document with latest changes.
>> >
>> >
>> > >>>>>The other one, ZK-2383, needs work.
>> >
>> > Here, I'm planning to revert ZOOKEEPER-2026 committed code and makes
>> this
>> > issue open for discussion/fix. Does it sound good?
>> >
>>
>> Given 2026 is already shipping I would be concerned about reverting it
>> at this point. Why wouldn't we just fix the remaining issue(s)?
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>> > Thanks,
>> > Rakesh
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Flavio Junqueira 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Thanks for bootstrapping the release process for 3.4.9. ZK-1045 is a
>> major
>> > > change and I suggest we give time for folks to try it out before
>> cutting a
>> > > release candidate. Ideally, we check it in and give a few weeks until
>> we
>> > > cut a release candidate.
>> > >
>> > > One of the blockers, ZK-2314 has only one remaining task which is to
>> > > document missing SASL properties, so that should be easy. The other
>> one,
>> > > ZK-2383, needs work.
>> > >
>> > > Folks should check the remaining issues to determine if there is any
>> other
>> > > blocker that we missed in that list.
>> > >
>> > > -Flavio
>> > >
>> > > > On 07 Jul 2016, at 05:12, Rakesh Radhakrishnan 
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi All,
>> > > >
>> > > > I am interested in going through the release process as the RM.
>> > > >
>> > > > I could see total 23 issues marked for 3.4.9 release as of now,
>> which
>> > > > includes 2 blockers, 6 critical, 12 major and 3 minor issues. I
>> count 15
>> > > > issues fixed/committed already for 3.4.9 which includes 6 blockers
>> and 2
>> > > > critical(security related) issues. I think it is a good time to
>> initiate
>> > > > the discussion of 3.4.9 release processes.
>> > > >
>> > > > Please find the open issues here, https://goo.gl/SEliwm
>> > > >
>> > > > Currently, I'm focusing on ZOOKEEPER-1045 sasl feature which I
>> think is
>> > > > much appreciated/awaited feature and I'd like to include this if
>> everyone
>> > > > agrees. Appreciate help in reviewing/testing the patch and making it
>> > > stable
>> > > > for release. Also, please feel free to push your favorite issues
>> ahead of
>> > > > 3.4.9 release.
>> > > >
>> > > > I hope we should be able to close all blockers and critical issues
>> in a
>> > > > month. Kindly requesting everyone to look at the issues marked for
>> 3.4.9
>> > > > and push these asap or can be pushed out to 3.4.10. I will focus my
>> code
>> > > > review time on these.
>> > > >
>> > > > Please let me know your thoughts on the plan.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > Rakesh
>> > >
>> > >
>>
>
>