>From the release guide, I was under the impression that the release manager is free to cancel once an issue is discovered. Canceling is not a release, so should not require a specific number of -1s. See [0]
That said, -1 to 0.5.0-RC1 because of the regression in Flink and perhaps other runners. [0] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/release-guide/index.html#vote-on-the-release-candidate "If there are any issues found in the release candidate, reply on the vote thread to cancel the vote. There’s no need to wait 72 hours." On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Ken, > > agree. > > I'm waiting for other -1 to formally cancel the vote. > > Thanks ! > Regards > JB > > > On 02/02/2017 04:11 AM, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > >> Unless there is a strenuous objection, I think we should roll forwards >> with >> a surgical "revert" of just the relevant logic, as in >> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/1901 >> >> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Kenneth Knowles <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> The revert is actually quite complex internally. I think there might be a >>> ~5 line roll forward, since the lost functionality was pretty trivial. >>> I'll >>> give it a quick try, as it will be worth it if it works out. >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> I opened this PR with three revert commits: >>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/1883 >>>> >>>> I also started PostCommit runs for this: >>>> - >>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Beam/job/beam_PostCommit_Java >>>> _MavenInstall/2486/ >>>> - >>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Beam/job/beam_PostCommit_Java >>>> _RunnableOnService_Flink/1493/ >>>> - >>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Beam/job/beam_PostCommit_Java >>>> _RunnableOnService_Spark/803/ >>>> - >>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Beam/job/beam_PostCommit_Java >>>> _RunnableOnService_Apex/ >>>> (still >>>> waiting in queue as of writing) >>>> - >>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Beam/job/beam_PostCommit_Java >>>> _RunnableOnService_Dataflow/ >>>> (still >>>> waiting in queue as of writing) >>>> >>>> I think the MavenInstall hooks fail because the (Google-internal) >>>> Dataflow >>>> Runner Harness doesn't work with the changed code, though I'm only >>>> guessing >>>> here. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 at 21:26 Aljoscha Krettek <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Agreed, since it's a regression. Let's hope that the transitive closure >>>> of >>>> "revert those two commits" doesn't get to large. >>>> >>>> I'll checkout the release-0.5.0 branch and see where we get with >>>> reverting. >>>> >>>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 at 19:28 Kenneth Knowles <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I agree. -1 and let's do the smartest thing to undo the regression. >>>> >>>> Those two commits are not sufficient to restore late data dropping. >>>> You'll >>>> also need to revert the switch of the Flink runner to use new DoFn, >>>> maybe >>>> more. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected] >>>> > >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Basically, my question is: is it a regression ? If yes, definitely a -1 >>>>> and we should cancel the release. >>>>> >>>>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but the commits in the >>>>> >>>> LateDataDroppingDoFnRunner >>>> >>>>> introduced a regression. So, I would cancel this vote and revert the >>>>> two >>>>> commits for RC2. >>>>> >>>>> WDYT ? >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> JB >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 01/31/2017 07:13 PM, Dan Halperin wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Should we revert the CLs that lost the functionality? I'd really not >>>>>> >>>>> like >>>> >>>>> to ship a release with such a functional regression.... >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >>>>>> >>>>> [email protected]> >>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Fair enough. Let's do that. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks ! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>> JB >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 01/31/2017 06:58 PM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm not sure. Poperly fixing this will take some time, especially >>>>>>> >>>>>> since >>>> >>>>> we >>>>>>>> have to add tests to prevent breakage from happening in the future. >>>>>>>> Plus, >>>>>>>> if my analysis is correct other runners might also not have proper >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> late >>>> >>>>> data dropping and it's fine to have a release with some missing >>>>>>>> features. >>>>>>>> (There's more besides dropping.) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think we should go ahead and fix for 0.6. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 18:23 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Aljoscha, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> so you propose to cancel this vote to prepare a RC2 ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 01/31/2017 05:06 PM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It's not just an issue with the Flink Runner, if I'm not mistaken. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Flink had late-data dropping via the LateDataDroppingDoFnRunner >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> (which >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> got >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "disabled" by the two commits I mention in the issue) while I think >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>> the Apex and Spark Runners might not have had dropping in the >>>>>>>>>> first >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> place. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> (Not sure about this last part.) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> As I now wrote to the issue I think this could be a blocker >>>>>>>>>> because >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> we >>>> >>>>> don't have the correct output in some cases. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 at 02:16 Davor Bonaci <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It looks good to me, but let's hear Aljoscha's opinion on >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> BEAM-1346. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> A passing suite of Jenkins jobs: >>>>>>>>>>> * https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PreCommit_Java_MavenInsta >>>>>>>>>>> ll/6870/ >>>>>>>>>>> * https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PostCommit_Java_MavenInst >>>>>>>>>>> all/2474/ >>>>>>>>>>> * >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PostCommit_Java_RunnableO >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> nService_Apex/336/ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PostCommit_Java_RunnableO >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> nService_Flink/1470/ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PostCommit_Java_RunnableO >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> nService_Spark/786/ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PostCommit_Java_RunnableO >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> nService_Dataflow/2130/ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Dan Halperin <[email protected] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I am worried about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-1346 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> RC1 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> and would at least wait for resolution there before proceeding. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 3:48 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Good catch for the PPMC, I'm upgrading the email template in the >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> release >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> guide (it was a copy/paste). >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 01/30/2017 11:50 AM, Sergio Fernández wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> So far I've successfully checked: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * signatures and digests >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * source releases file layouts >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * matched git tags and commit ids >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * incubator suffix and disclaimer >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * NOTICE and LICENSE files >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * license headers >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * clean build (Java 1.8.0_91, Maven 3.3.9, Debian amd64) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Two minor comments that do not block the release: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * Usually I like to see the commit id referencing the rc, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> since >>>>>>>>>>>>>> git >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tags >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> can be changed. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> * Just a formality, "PPMC" is not committee that plays a role >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> anymore, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> you're a PMC now ;-) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 9:55 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi everyone, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0.5.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [2], which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 >>>>>>>>>>> [3], >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [4], >>>> >>>>> * source code tag "v0.5.0-RC1" [5], >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> API >>>> >>>>> reference manual [6]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> majority >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> approval, with at least 3 PPMC affirmative votes. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> /secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje >>>> >>>>> ctId=12319527&version=12338859 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/0.5.0/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [4] https://repository.apache.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> content/repositories/orgapache >>>> >>>>> beam-1010/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [5] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> repos/asf?p=beam.git;a=tag;h=r >>>> >>>>> efs/tags/v0.5.0-RC1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/132 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>>>>>>>>>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>>>>>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>>>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > [email protected] > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com >
