curator-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cameron McKenzie <mckenzie....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Curator version 2.10.0 and 3.1.0, RC2
Date Fri, 12 Feb 2016 00:51:46 GMT
All 2.10.0 tests pass
3.1 is a bit flaky, but pass eventually.

+1 to both (binding)

cheers

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 5:21 AM, Mike Drob <mdrob@apache.org> wrote:

> All 2.10 tests pass.
> Most 3.1 tests pass, the ones that didn't pass did so when rerun in
> isolation.
> Signatures match zip file
> Zip file matches source tag
> Licence headers look good.
> Compatibility reports look good.
>
> +1 to both (binding)
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:52 AM, David Kesler <DKesler@yodle.com> wrote:
>
> > Gotcha.  Thanks for the explanation.  Figured it's better to be safe than
> > sorry.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jordan Zimmerman [mailto:jordan@jordanzimmerman.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2016 11:40 AM
> > To: dev@curator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Curator version 2.10.0 and 3.1.0, RC2
> >
> > ZK 3.5 has an odd version numbering scheme. I’ve complained to them.
> > "3.5.1-alpha” is not really an alpha. Lots of people are using it in
> > Production. The ZK team wants to communicate that it should be used with
> > caution. There will never be a non-alpha 3.5.1. The next version will be
> > 3.5.2-alpha, etc. until they’re comfortable to remove the “alpha” tag.
> >
> > -JZ
> >
> > > On Feb 11, 2016, at 11:36 AM, David Kesler <DKesler@yodle.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > *Nonbinding*
> > > 2.10.0: +1.  I tested against our internal libraries that use ZK and
> > spot-checked a few types of our applications and everything looked fine.
> > >
> > > I can't check 3.1.0 since I have issues even running with 3.0.0 and
> > haven't had time to look into upgrading our stuff to be compatible with
> > it.  While trying to test it, I did notice that 3.1.0 is pulling in an
> > alpha build of zookeeper (3.5.1-alpha) which seemed kind of odd.  Not
> sure
> > if it's intentional or not, but I thought I'd bring it up.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jordan Zimmerman [mailto:randgalt@apache.org]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 3:30 PM
> > > To: dev@curator.apache.org
> > > Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache Curator version 2.10.0 and 3.1.0, RC2
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > This is a combined vote to release Apache Curator versions 2.10.0 and
> > 3.1.0, RC2
> > >
> > > *** Please download, test and vote within approx. 72 hours
> > >
> > > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag) and binaries are provided
> > for convenience.
> > >
> > > Link to release notes:
> > > 2.1.10 -
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12333942
> > > 3.1.0 -
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12333884
> > >
> > > Staging repos:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/2.10.0/
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/3.1.0/
> > >
> > > Binary artifacts:
> > > 2.1.10 -
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1023
> > > 3.1.0 -
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1022
> > >
> > > The tags to be voted upon:
> > > 2.10.0 -
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=d7bc24a6e82490a42c87e7ecd14efb209a8f1e66
> > > 3.1.0 -
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=a5d3edab7fb290a00cb6ad579671396ca9c1f831
> > >
> > > Curator's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > > http://www.apache.org/dist/curator/KEYS
> > >
> > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message