zookeeper-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Norbert Kalmar <nkal...@cloudera.com.INVALID>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.5 candidate 4
Date Thu, 18 Apr 2019 09:08:24 GMT
Thanks Patrick, I created a Jira for the fixes:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-3369
Should we modify the artifact name for the binary as well? Either to "
apache-zookeeper-3.5.5-bin.tar.gz" or leave apache out of it: "
zookeeper-3.5.5-bin.tar.gz"
I think it would make sense to keep the two tarball name similar.

Regards,
Norbert

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 8:28 PM Patrick Hunt <phunt@apache.org> wrote:

> -1 currently. On the plus side things seem to be functional and I tested
> 3.4 against this release in a mixed ensemble and it seemed fine.
>
> I would recommend changing the name
> from zookeeper-3.5.5-source-package.tar.gz to apache-zookeeper-3.5.5.tar.gz
> - this is _the_ artifact. Everything else is a convenience (e.g. the
> binary). Prepend apache to the binary name as well.
>
> When I unpack the binary archive it has the same toplevel directory name as
> the source, do we want that or should it have binary in the name? Principle
> of least surprise seems to say the directory name should match the archive
> name.
>
> Where are the api docs? I did a "mvn install" and I see the user/admin/...
> html docs, but I can't find the api docs. The readme doesn't shed much
> light, and specifically says "Full documentation for this release can also
> be found in docs/index.html" which seems to be incorrect at this point, as
> docs is in the binary but not the source. Perhaps we should have a general
> README and a binary specific readme?
>
> also inaccurate "The release artifact contains the following jar files in
> "dist-maven" directory" which doesn't exist for the source distro.
>
> netty-all-4.1.29.Final.jar does not include a license file, nor are we
> including one in h the lib directory.
>
> In the binary I don't see an api either. shouldn't we be including that
> along with the regular docs?
>
> Patrick
>
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 6:52 AM Andor Molnar <andor@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > This is the first stable release of 3.5 branch: 3.5.5. It resolves 117
> > issues, including Maven migration, Quorum TLS, TTL nodes and lots of
> other
> > performance and stability improvements.
> >
> > The full release notes is available at:
> >
> >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310801&version=12343268
> >
> > *** Please download, test and vote by April 21st 2019, 23:59 UTC+0. ***
> >
> > Source files:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/zookeeper/zookeeper-3.5.5-rc4/
> >
> > Maven staging repos:
> >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/zookeeper/parent/3.5.5/
> >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/zookeeper/zookeeper-jute/3.5.5/
> >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.5.5/
> >
> > The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: release-3.5.5-rc4
> >
> > ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
> >
> > Should we release this candidate?
> >
> >
>

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