Re: [CANCEL][VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

Hi guys Quick update for RC3: BEAM-3668 & BEAM-3519 have a PR in review (shading netty in GCP IO). Hopefully, the PR will be merge later today, then it will be cherry-pick on release-2.3.0 branch. As soon as it's done, I will cut a RC3 (hopefully tonight or tomorrow). Regards JB On 02/10/2018

Re: [CANCEL][VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/4651 is in review. On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 1:38 PM Reuven Lax wrote: > Late to respond, but +1 to this decision. > > On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 2:26 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré > wrote: > >> Hi guys, >> >> due to BEAM-3519 [1], I

Re: [CANCEL][VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

Late to respond, but +1 to this decision. On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 2:26 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi guys, > > due to BEAM-3519 [1], I cancel RC2. > > We have to shade netty version in the IOs to avoid issue with netty > version in > runners (Spark in that case). > > We

[CANCEL][VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

Hi guys, due to BEAM-3519 [1], I cancel RC2. We have to shade netty version in the IOs to avoid issue with netty version in runners (Spark in that case). We gonna work on a fix (I should be pretty fast), and I will cut a RC3 when cherry-pick on release-2.3.0 branch. Regards JB [1]

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

+1 for option 1 (fix and create a new +RC3). This not only breaks examples, this means that users of the spark runner won't have any guarantee about the fact that the Google IOs work or not because of possible missing methods or conflicts between netty versions. On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 7:31 AM,

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

since it breaks only examples not sure it does worth yet another reroll (which means already a 2 weeks delay on the plan). Users will be affected the same anyway - and in an expected way until beam handles classloaders per transform. A note in the side is fine probably. Romain Manni-Bucau

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 10:18 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > It means a RC3 then. > > Basically, we have two options: > > 1. I cancel RC2, to include PR 4645 and cut a RC3. It can be done super > fast > (today). > +1 for option 1 since IMO we should not release with

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

It means a RC3 then. Basically, we have two options: 1. I cancel RC2, to include PR 4645 and cut a RC3. It can be done super fast (today). 2. We continue RC2 vote and we add a note about shading (as I did for the TextIO issue with Flink runner). I'm more in favor of 1 as the fix is already

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

IMHO it is not a blocker but an incompatibility between spark and some IO stack. Trivial workaround is to shade the io before importing it in its project. Amternative is to wrap IO in custom classloaders. Didnt check for this one but it is a common beam issue to have conflicts between runners/io

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

Is it specific to this release ? I think it was like this before no ? Regards JB On 02/09/2018 12:48 AM, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > Since root cause is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3519 I marked > it > a blocker so we can discuss fixes or workarounds there. > > On Thu, Feb 8, 2018

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

Since root cause is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3519 I marked it a blocker so we can discuss fixes or workarounds there. On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 1:24 PM, Lukasz Cwik wrote: > I validated several of the quickstarts and updated the spreadsheet and > currently am

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

I validated several of the quickstarts and updated the spreadsheet and currently am voting -1 for this release due to Spark runner failing. Filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3668 with the full details. On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 10:32 AM, Valentyn Tymofieiev

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

Yes (thanks Kenn!): https://s.apache.org/beam-2.3.0-release-validation On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote: > Do we have a release validation spreadsheet for this one? > > On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 9:30 AM Ahmet Altay wrote: > >> +1 >>

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

Do we have a release validation spreadsheet for this one? On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 9:30 AM Ahmet Altay wrote: > +1 > > I verified python quick start, mobile gaming examples, streaming on Direct > and Dataflow runners. Thank you JB! > > On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:27 AM, Romain

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

+1 I verified python quick start, mobile gaming examples, streaming on Direct and Dataflow runners. Thank you JB! On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:27 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > +1 (non-binding), thanks JB for the effort! > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

+1 (non-binding), thanks JB for the effort! Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn |

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

+1 (binding) Validated SHAs + tag vs source.zip file. Run mvn clean install -Prelease OK Validated that the 3 regressions reported for RC1 were fixed. Run Nexmark on Direct/Flink runner on local mode, no regressions now. Installed python version on virtualenv and run wordcount with success. On

[VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #2

Hi everyone, Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version 2.3.0, as follows: [ ] +1, Approve the release [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments) The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes: * JIRA release notes [1],