beam-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thomas Weise <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release 2.13.0, release candidate #2
Date Wed, 05 Jun 2019 16:22:24 GMT
+1 and I think all of that can be covered with JIRA.

Irrespective the release manager still needs to pay attention to the
communication on the VOTE thread.

On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 9:19 AM Ahmet Altay <altay@google.com> wrote:

> Checking that JIRA link sounds reasonable as long as we can agree that it
> is single source of truth for cherry pick requests. I also agree with Cham,
> requests need to come with a reason.
>
> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 7:38 AM Ismaël Mejía <iemejia@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I don't think we need anything fancier or marking even as Blocker some
>> of this stuff, would not be enough just to monitor that [1] has no
>> issues? (of course if the interested party has not put the fix version
>> to the current ongoing vote one this is a mistake).
>>
>> [1]
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20BEAM%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.13.0
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 4:23 PM Chamikara Jayalath <chamikara@google.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 5:02 PM Ahmet Altay <altay@google.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I would suggest have a single way of tracking cherry pick request to
>> an RC. Currently we use emails on the RC thread, open PRs, and Jiras tagged
>> for the release. This is confusing the person doing the release while they
>> are juggling multiple things. How about we ask all cherry pick requests to
>> have a JIRA filed against that release and marked as blockers?
>> >
>> >
>> > I agree with this and with what Ankur said. Release blockers should be
>> more explicit and should come with a reason. After voting thread start, I
>> would say this should include a mail to the voting thread as well as a
>> blocking JIRA. Other PRs opened against the branch may or may not get
>> merged at the discretion of the release manager.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Cham
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 1:05 PM Ankur Goenka <goenka@google.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> That makes sense.
>> >>> I would also like to add that the corresponding PR should be added to
>> an open blocking Jira for the release to keep a single source to check.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 12:15 PM Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I would actually suggest that the following search needs to be
>> triaged to zero before cutting an RC:
>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+base%3Arelease-2.13.0
>> .
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 11:17 AM Ankur Goenka <goenka@google.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Sorry, I missed the comment for not including weekend's to 72
hours
>> voting period.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I meant to update the blog post
>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8667/files once we have finalized
>> the RC so that it can be consistent. Please add any comments to PR and I
>> can incorporate them.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> As we did not go for 3rd RC and
>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8714 was not blocking the 2.13
>> release, I went with the release.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I have released the maven artifacts for beam. So I suppose,
we can
>> not do another RC for 2.13.0.
>> >>>>> If we need anything urgently in 2.13 then we can do a bug fix
>> release 2.13.1.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 8:59 AM Thomas Weise <thw@apache.org>
wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> This seems a rushed and things fall through the cracks.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Max had requested to not include the weekend into the voting
>> period.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Valentyn: I had the same question on the first RC. The PR
should
>> be included into the vote for review. You can find it here:
>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8667/files
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I had requested to include following backport PR before
the RC:
>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8714  - It's not blocking but would
>> be nice if someone can merge it for any future release from this branch.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Thanks,
>> >>>>>> Thomas
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 1:59 AM Maximilian Michels <mxm@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> The summary is not correct. Binding votes (in order):
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Ahmet Altay
>> >>>>>>> Robert Bradshaw
>> >>>>>>> Maximilian Michels
>> >>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> >>>>>>> Lukasz Cwik
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> A total of 5 binding votes.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On 04.06.19 02:37, Ankur Goenka wrote:
>> >>>>>>> > +1
>> >>>>>>> > Thanks for validating the release and voting.
>> >>>>>>> > With 0(-1), 6(+1) and 3(+1 binding) votes, I am
concluding the
>> voting
>> >>>>>>> > process.
>> >>>>>>> > I am going ahead with the release and will keep
the community
>> posted
>> >>>>>>> > with the updates.
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 1:57 PM Andrew Pilloud <
>> apilloud@google.com
>> >>>>>>> > <mailto:apilloud@google.com>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >     +1 Reviewed the Nexmark java and SQL perfkit
graphs, no
>> obvious
>> >>>>>>> >     regressions over the previous release.
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >     On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 1:15 PM Lukasz Cwik
<
>> lcwik@google.com
>> >>>>>>> >     <mailto:lcwik@google.com>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >         Thanks for the clarification.
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >         On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:40 AM Ankur Goenka
<
>> goenka@google.com
>> >>>>>>> >         <mailto:goenka@google.com>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >             Yes, i meant i will close the voting
at 5pm and
>> start the
>> >>>>>>> >             release process.
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >             On Mon, Jun 3, 2019, 10:59 AM Lukasz
Cwik <
>> lcwik@google.com
>> >>>>>>> >             <mailto:lcwik@google.com>>
wrote:
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >                 Ankur, did you mean to say your
going to close
>> the vote
>> >>>>>>> >                 today at 5pm? (and then complete
the release
>> afterwards)
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >                 On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 10:54 AM
Ankur Goenka
>> >>>>>>> >                 <goenka@google.com <mailto:goenka@google.com>>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >                     Thanks for validating and voting.
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >                     We have 4 binding votes.
>> >>>>>>> >                     I will complete the release
today 5PM.
>> Please raise
>> >>>>>>> >                     any concerns before that.
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >                     Thanks,
>> >>>>>>> >                     Ankur
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >                     On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 8:36
AM Lukasz Cwik
>> >>>>>>> >                     <lcwik@google.com <mailto:lcwik@google.com>>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >                         Since the gearpump issue
has been
>> ongoing since
>> >>>>>>> >                         2.10, I can't consider
it a blocker for
>> this
>> >>>>>>> >                         release and am voting +1.
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >                         On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at
7:13 AM
>> Jean-Baptiste
>> >>>>>>> >                         Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net
>> >>>>>>> >                         <mailto:jb@nanthrax.net>>
wrote:
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >                             +1 (binding)
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >                             Quickly tested on beam-samples.
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >                             Regards
>> >>>>>>> >                             JB
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >                             On 31/05/2019 04:52,
Ankur Goenka
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> >                              > Hi everyone,
>> >>>>>>> >                              >
>> >>>>>>> >                              > Please review
and vote on the
>> release
>> >>>>>>> >                             candidate #2 for the
version
>> >>>>>>> >                              > 2.13.0, as follows:
>> >>>>>>> >                              >
>> >>>>>>> >                              > [ ] +1, Approve
the release
>> >>>>>>> >                              > [ ] -1, Do not
approve the
>> release
>> >>>>>>> >                             (please provide specific
comments)
>> >>>>>>> >                              >
>> >>>>>>> >                              > The complete
staging area is
>> available
>> >>>>>>> >                             for your review, which
includes:
>> >>>>>>> >                              > * JIRA release
notes [1],
>> >>>>>>> >                              > * the official
Apache source
>> release to
>> >>>>>>> >                             be deployed to dist.apache.org
>> >>>>>>> >                             <http://dist.apache.org>
>> >>>>>>> >                              > <http://dist.apache.org>
[2],
>> which is
>> >>>>>>> >                             signed with the key
with
>> >>>>>>> >                              > fingerprint
>> >>>>>>> >
>>  6356C1A9F089B0FA3DE8753688934A6699985948 [3],
>> >>>>>>> >                              > * all artifacts
to be deployed
>> to the
>> >>>>>>> >                             Maven Central Repository
[4],
>> >>>>>>> >                              > * source code
tag "v2.13.0-RC2"
>> [5],
>> >>>>>>> >                              > * website pull
request listing
>> the
>> >>>>>>> >                             release [6] and publishing
the API
>> >>>>>>> >                              > reference manual
[7].
>> >>>>>>> >                              > * Python artifacts
are deployed
>> along
>> >>>>>>> >                             with the source release
to the
>> >>>>>>> >                              > dist.apache.org
<
>> http://dist.apache.org>
>> >>>>>>> >                             <http://dist.apache.org>
[2].
>> >>>>>>> >                              > * Validation
sheet with a tab
>> for 2.13.0
>> >>>>>>> >                             release to help with
validation
>> >>>>>>> >                              > [8].
>> >>>>>>> >                              >
>> >>>>>>> >                              > The vote will
be open for at
>> least 72
>> >>>>>>> >                             hours. It is adopted
by majority
>> >>>>>>> >                              > approval, with
at least 3 PMC
>> affirmative
>> >>>>>>> >                             votes.
>> >>>>>>> >                              >
>> >>>>>>> >                              > Thanks,
>> >>>>>>> >                              > Ankur
>> >>>>>>> >                              >
>> >>>>>>> >                              > [1]
>> >>>>>>> >                              >
>> >>>>>>> >
>> https://jira.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12345166
>> >>>>>>> >                              > [2]
>> >>>>>>> >
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.13.0/
>> >>>>>>> >                              > [3]
>> >>>>>>> >
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
>> >>>>>>> >                              > [4]
>> >>>>>>> >
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1070/
>> >>>>>>> >                              > [5]
>> >>>>>>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.13.0-RC2
>> >>>>>>> >                              > [6]
>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8645
>> >>>>>>> >                              > [7]
>> >>>>>>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/589
>> >>>>>>> >                              > [8]
>> >>>>>>> >                              >
>> >>>>>>> >
>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qk-N5vjXvbcEk68GjbkSZTR8AGqyNUM-oLFo_ZXBpJw/edit#gid=1031196952
>> >>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>> >                             --
>> >>>>>>> >                             Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> >>>>>>> >                             jbonofre@apache.org
<mailto:
>> jbonofre@apache.org>
>> >>>>>>> >                             http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> >>>>>>> >                             Talend - http://www.talend.com
>> >>>>>>> >
>>
>

Mime
View raw message