hive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jesus Camacho Rodriguez <jcamachorodrig...@hortonworks.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Apache Hive 2.1.0 Release Candidate 3
Date Mon, 20 Jun 2016 15:05:37 GMT
Thanks to everyone who has tested the release candidate and given
their comments and votes.

The tally is as follows.

4 +1s:
Prasanth Jayachandran
Gunther Hagleitner
Sushanth Sowmyan
Jason Dere

No 0s or -1s.

Therefore I am delighted to announce that the proposal to release
Apache Hive 2.1.0 has passed! We'll now roll the release out to the
mirrors.

In addition, I have created HIVE-14059 to fix the issue with the
missing headers for the 2 files (thanks for catching that one
Sushanth).






On 6/17/16, 3:54 PM, "Jason Dere" <jdere@hortonworks.com> wrote:

>Checked signatures, ran build and a few tests.
>+1
>________________________________________
>From: Sushanth Sowmyan <khorgath@gmail.com>
>Sent: Friday, June 17, 2016 3:30 PM
>To: dev@hive.apache.org
>Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Hive 2.1.0 Release Candidate 3
>
>Actually, to be more explicit, per Thejas' case of the top level
>license taking precedence, this RC has my +1.
>
>On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Sushanth Sowmyan <khorgath@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I will happily rescind my -1 and even convert it to a +1 if the top
>> level license does hold. I thought that the RAT check was a necessary
>> blocker.
>>
>> (Although, if the top level license does cover across the board, we
>> may want to open a new discussion on whether having a license
>> requirement for every source file is necessary in the first place, and
>> tweak the definition of the rat check so it does not fail it in this
>> case.)
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Thejas Nair <thejas.nair@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I don't think the missing headers for 2 files mandates a respin of
>>> this RC .  It is not really a case of 'incompatible' license or code
>>> that shouldn't be shipped.
>>> We have a top level license file that covers the entire project,
>>> including these files.
>>> IMO, We should fix it if there is a new RC for some other reason. But
>>> this alone doesn't seem to make new RC necessary.
>>>
>>> Sushanth, Can you please reconsider your -1 ?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Sushanth Sowmyan <khorgath@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>> -1, terribly sorry I didn't check for this earlier, but the RAT check
>>>> fails for this.
>>>>
>>>> If you run mvn apache-rat:check , then you see the following issue:
>>>>
>>>> Unapproved licenses:
>>>>
>>>>   /Users/sush/t/rel/apache-hive-2.1.0-src/common/src/java/org/apache/hive/common/util/DateParser.java
>>>>   /Users/sush/t/rel/apache-hive-2.1.0-src/common/src/test/org/apache/hive/common/util/TestDateParser.java
>>>>
>>>> Basically, these two files are missing the apache license header. We
>>>> need to add them in.
>>>>
>>>> All other things are good, though. It has the oracle fix I asked for
>>>> in RC2, md5s and signatures check out, compilation works on source
>>>> package, and I'm able to run the hive binary from the binary package.
>>>> I also tried a number of tests, and I've run a rat test on the release
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez
>>>> <jcamachorodriguez@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>>>>> Apache Hive 2.1.0 Release Candidate 3 is available here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~jcamacho/hive-2.1.0-rc3
>>>>>
>>>>> Maven artifacts are available here:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehive-1057/
>>>>>
>>>>> Source tag for RC3 is at:
>>>>> https://github.com/apache/hive/releases/tag/release-2.1.0-rc3
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Voting will conclude in 72 hours.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hive PMC Members: Please test and vote.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
Mime
View raw message