hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jonathan Hsieh <...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: ANN: 0.90.6 RC3 available for download
Date Sat, 11 Feb 2012 13:48:43 GMT
Hey Ram,

Thanks for doing this.  For some projects I've been involved with in the
incubator, the license stuff is something a lot of apache veterans care
about strongly.

Jon.

On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 3:12 AM, Ramkrishna.S.Vasudevan <
ramkrishna.vasudevan@huawei.com> wrote:

> Sure Stack. I will do it.  Also let me see if any issues could go into the
> next RC.
> I probably think we have another one or two in store.
>
> Regards
> Ram
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: saint.ack@gmail.com [mailto:saint.ack@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Stack
> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 10:16 PM
> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ANN: 0.90.6 RC3 available for download
>
> Ram:
>
> I'd say go ahead and roll a new RC.
>
> I tried to convince Jon that this RC was no worse that previous
> releases off this branch and that we could fix the licensing issue in
> the next point release but he is not having it.
>
> While its true we could outvote him, as the rules allow, in general I
> think it healthier all around if there are no votes against a release
> when it goes out.  Its tough enough finding volunteers to spend some
> time evaluating candidates as it is; if someone has taken the time to
> play with the release as its plain Jon has then I'd say lets respect
> their opinion.
>
> Good on you Ram,
> St.Ack
>
> P.S. Let me sign the artifacts before you announce the next candidate;
> I'll download them and play with them to evaluate them and if
> basically good, will do the signing.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 7:16 AM, Ramkrishna.S.Vasudevan
> <ramkrishna.vasudevan@huawei.com> wrote:
> > Hi Jon
> >
> > Yes Jon I am fine with it.  If I get +1 on this RC then I will release
> the
> > RC3 as the final version.  If I don't get then I will take another RC
> with
> > your changes.
> >
> > Thanks Jon.  Have a joyful vacation. (smile)
> >
> > Regards
> > Ram
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jonathan Hsieh [mailto:jon@cloudera.com]
> > Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 6:01 PM
> > To: dev@hbase.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: ANN: 0.90.6 RC3 available for download
> >
> > Ram,
> >
> > Sounds perfect.
> >
> > You've asked to freeze the 0.90 branch.  Is it cool if I commit two
> > rat/license related patches onto the 0.90 branch later today?  (I'm going
> > to be away from computer for a few weeks -- long needed vacation).
> >
> > Jon.
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:07 PM, Ramkrishna.S.Vasudevan <
> > ramkrishna.vasudevan@huawei.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Jon
> >>
> >> First of all thanks a lot for working on the license issues.
> >>
> >> As discussed with Stack the key signing part he said he can do it.
> >> Currently for the 0.90.6RC3 only you have voted.  I received 2 +1s on
> RC2
> >> only.
> >> If you can commit your changes once again we can take another RC for
> > 0.90.6
> >> but it may delay the release further.
> >> So in another 2 days we get more +1s then we go ahead with this Rc3,  if
> >> not
> >> take another RC with your recent JIRAs and release that one.
> >>
> >> Does that sound ok ? Good on you Jon.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Ram
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jonathan Hsieh [mailto:jon@cloudera.com]
> >> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 10:54 AM
> >> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: ANN: 0.90.6 RC3 available for download
> >>
> >> Hey Ram,
> >>
> >> You are the release manager so you get to decide if on the status of the
> >> 0.90.6 release. I believe we have a workaround for the key signing bit.
>  I
> >> believe the rules say a sufficient condition for a release is to have at
> >> least 3 formal pmc +1's as long as there are more +1's than -1's.
>  (There
> >> is no veto on releases).
> >>
> >> I've created patches that make rat run when you add a -Prelease profile
> to
> >> the 0.90.x build and also a patch the fixes the licenses making rat
> pass.
> >>  If these are applied my current -1 vote will turn into a +1.
> >>
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5363 (takes 0.92 and trunk
> as
> >> well)
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5377
> >>
> >> Also, the license fixes for 0.92/trunk were fairly trivial and I'll give
> >> Elliot credit for them on that patch:
> >>
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5364
> >>
> >> Jon.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <jon@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > I've filed a jira to add rat check to the build
> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5363
> >> >
> >> > And to fix the licenses:
> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5364
> >> >
> >> > I plan on implementing them when I get in to the office today.
> >> >
> >> > Jon.
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 8:39 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <jon@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:37 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jon@cloudera.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>> > I was reading into what goes into a release, and based on
this I
> >> think
> >> >>> of
> >> >>> > have to -1 the release from an admin point of view.
> >> >>> > - mvn rat:check looks like it has problems (there are also
some in
> >> the
> >> >>> > 0.92.0 release) -- attached to this email.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I went through a few.  Looks like its complaining mostly because
of
> >> >>> empty files, files it can't read the apache license in (because
its
> >> >>> got xml preamble), etc.  I'd say this is important but my guess
is
> >> >>> that 0.90.5 wasn't much better.  I'd suggest we could file an issue
> to
> >> >>> fix this in 0.90.7/0.92.1 but that maybe its not enough to sink
the
> >> >>> release?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >> I chatted with some of the apache veterans, and I'm going to stand
by
> >> the
> >> >> -1 unless the licenses are fixed.  It should be trivial fix.
> >> >>
> >> >>  See this: http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
> >> >> "What files in an Apache release do not require a license header?"
> >> >>
> >> >> That said, release votes are by majority, and there is no veto:
> >> >> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> >> >>
> >> >> Jon.
> >> >> --
> >> >> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> >> >> // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> >> >> // jon@cloudera.com
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> >> > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> >> > // jon@cloudera.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> >> // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> >> // jon@cloudera.com
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > // jon@cloudera.com
> >
>
>


-- 
// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// Software Engineer, Cloudera
// jon@cloudera.com

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