Thank you for the comments. Added the LICENSE and NOTICE files to the python ZIP file (also updates, hashes and signature.) Will add this to the release guide as well. If everyone is comfortable with this change I will proceed.
Thank you, Ahmet On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Davor Bonaci <da...@apache.org> wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Contingent on adding NOTICE and LICENSE files into > "apache-beam-0.6.0-python.zip", just as they are present in the > "apache-beam-0.6.0-source-release.zip". > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > +1 (binding) > > > > - verified release signature and hashes > > - mvn install -Prelease runs smoothly > > - created a Quickstart against the staging repo > > - ran Quickstart with Flink local mode > > - ran Quickstart against a Flink 1.2 cluster > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017, at 01:44, Eugene Kirpichov wrote: > > > Conclusion (see JIRA): Not a release blocker (but still a bug in > > > TestPipeline). > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 5:40 PM Eugene Kirpichov <kirpic...@google.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > +Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@data-artisans.com> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 5:30 PM Eugene Kirpichov < > kirpic...@google.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > +Stas Levin <stasle...@apache.org> +Thomas Groh <tg...@google.com> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 5:30 PM Eugene Kirpichov < > kirpic...@google.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-1712 might be a release > > > > blocker. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 4:53 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com.invalid > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Thank you for all the comment so far. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > bq. I would prefer that we have a .tar.gz release > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 4:21 PM, Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > > > > > > > - verified signatures + checksums > > > > > > - run mvn clean install -Prelease, all artifacts build and the > > tests > > > > run > > > > > > smoothly (modulo some local issues I had with the installation of > > tox > > > > for > > > > > > the python sdk, I created a PR to fix those in case other people > > can > > > > have > > > > > > the same trouble). > > > > > > > > > > > > Some remarks still to fix from the release, but that I don’t > > consider > > > > > > blockers: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. The section Getting Started in the main README.md needs to be > > > > updated > > > > > > with the information about the creating/activating the > virtualenv. > > At > > > > > this > > > > > > moment just running mvn clean install won’t work without this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > mvn clean install should run without any additional steps, including > > the > > > > creation of a virtualenv. tox will manage this process, and it is > > already > > > > integrated Maven. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Both zip files in the current release produce a folder with > the > > > > same > > > > > > name ‘apache-beam-0.6.0’. This can be messy if users unzip both > > files > > > > > into > > > > > > the same folder (as happened to me, the compressed files should > > > > produce a > > > > > > directory with the exact same name that the file, so > > > > > > apache-beam-0.6.0-python.zip will produce > apache-beam-0.6.0-python > > and > > > > > the > > > > > > other its respective directory. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. The name of the files of the release probably should be > > different: > > > > > > > > > > > > The source release could be just apache-beam-0.6.0.zip instead of > > > > > > apache-beam-0.6.0-source-release.zip considering that we don’t > > have > > > > > binary > > > > > > artifacts, or just apache-beam-0.6.0-src.zip following the > > convention > > > > of > > > > > > other apache projects. > > > > > > > > > > > > The python release also could be renamed from > > > > > > apache-beam-0.6.0-bin-python.zip instead of > > > > apache-beam-0.6.0-python.zip > > > > > > so > > > > > > users understand that these are executable files (but well I am > not > > > > sure > > > > > > about that one considering that python is a scripting language). > > > > > > > > > > > > > Python distribution is a source distribution, adding bin to the name > > would > > > > be confusing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Finally I would prefer that we have a .tar.gz release as JB > > mentioned > > > > in > > > > > > the previous vote, and as most apache projects do. In any case if > > the > > > > zip > > > > > > is somehow a requirement it would be nice to have both a .zip > and a > > > > > .tar.gz > > > > > > file. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should move this to a different thread. IMO, having a > single > > > > source of truth is better than having both file formats. Between both > > file > > > > formats I don't have a strong opinion but considering the Windows > > users zip > > > > might be a portable option. > > > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > Ahmet > > > > > > > > > > >
