+1 to releasing now and working on a fix for a follow-up release.

> On 8. Aug 2017, at 06:52, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi Kenn,
> 
> As said, I just gave an extra couple of days to Stas and I to try to fix the 
> issue. However, we didn't fix it yet, and I'm still struggling to find the 
> exact cause as we have different tests failures.
> 
> So, I will cut RC3 as it is and we will fix the tests issue for 2.2.0 that we 
> can release pretty quickly.
> We are holding the release for too long (roughly a month).
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> On 08/08/2017 01:27 AM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
>> I agree with Eugene's proposal.
>> Suppose it takes <n> days to grok and fix CreateStreamTest. If we compare
>> delaying 2.1.0 versus releasing it immediately and starting 2.2.0:
>>    - Users get 2.1.0 ASAP and then 2.2.0 in <n> days
>>    - Users get 2.1.0 in <n> days
>> The now-failing tests were flaky, and we have some confidence that the
>> changes that caused the failing are good. So if this is an apparent
>> regression for a user, it is likely that they are in danger already.
>> A third alternative is that users get 2.1.0 ASAP, 2.2.0 ASAP after that to
>> keep the cadence going, and 2.3.0 after <n> days if we can't sort this
>> quickly. This is consistent with treating it as an existing and ongoing
>> bug, which it likely is.
>> Kenn
>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Eugene Kirpichov <
>> kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
>>> If https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is a 2.1.0 blocker then
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-1868 also should be, because
>>> it's a failure of another method in the same test and I suppose it
>>> indicates brokenness to the same extent. Or both shouldn't.
>>> 
>>> Given the progress so far, the chances of resolving the JIRA quickly are
>>> looking bleak to me now, and the release has been going on for almost 1
>>> month, and many large improvements have been added to Beam HEAD since the
>>> first RC was cut.
>>> 
>>> I'm still in favor of:
>>> 1) cutting 2.1.0 RC3 immediately, and acknowledging that streaming in Spark
>>> runner in cluster mode is still (potentially) broken in this release - to
>>> the same or smaller extent than in 2.0.0, so this is not a regression. The
>>> extent is still not clear to me; I asked on the JIRA.
>>> 2) immediately or very soon after this 2.1.0, start cutting 2.2.0, and
>>> target these issues to 2.2.0.
>>> 
>>> My argument is:
>>> - 2.1.0 contains 2.5 months worth of new features, and releasing them will
>>> benefit a lot of existing Beam users
>>> - I don't think there are that many users for whom it's critically
>>> important whether the first release with working Spark streaming will be
>>> 2.1.0 or 2.2.0, especially if we start cutting 2.2.0 very soon. This is
>>> speculation though
>>> - (subjective personal feeling) The release process requires participation
>>> and momentum from community members, and letting it drag on for too long
>>> loses that momentum.
>>> 
>>> We should anyway pursue resolving the issues asap, and users who were
>>> eagerly waiting for Spark streaming to work properly can run Beam at HEAD
>>> in the window between when they are first resolved and when 2.2.0 is
>>> released.
>>> 
>>> What do you think?
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 9:31 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Another quick update.
>>>> 
>>>> Aviem updated the Jira as he and his team wants to take a look. I'm also
>>>> doing a
>>>> new bisect on my side. I've given an extra day to move forward. If we
>>>> don't have
>>>> clear statement tonight, then, I will cut the RC3 tonight or tomorrow
>>>> morning
>>>> (my time).
>>>> 
>>>> Regards
>>>> JB
>>>> 
>>>> On 08/05/2017 02:37 AM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:
>>>>> I did some more investigation on that JIRA
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 and my conclusion is:
>>>>> 
>>>>> We need to postpone that JIRA to 2.2.0 and finalize release 2.1.0
>>> as-is.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The TL;DR of my investigation is that:
>>>>> - We have some confidence that Spark runner in 2.1.0 generally works
>>>>> properly: it passes ValidatesRunner tests, and there's been some amount
>>>> of
>>>>> manual testing.
>>>>> - Release 2.0.0 does not contain a critical fix and, if I understand
>>>>> correctly, Spark runner at 2.0.0 was basically unusable in streaming
>>>>> cluster mode.
>>>>> - So, even if the JIRA signals that there is something wrong in the
>>> Spark
>>>>> runner at 2.1.0, it's definitely better than 2.0.0 so there is no
>>>>> regression for the user.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I moved the JIRA to 2.2.0 so there are no blocking issues remaining for
>>>>> 2.1.0. JB - the next step is for you to proceed with cutting the RC,
>>>>> correct?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:04 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Another quick update. Regarding BEAM-2671, I asked help from Stas and
>>>>>> Aviem on
>>>>>> this one. It's our high priority as it's the main blocking issue
>>> before
>>>>>> cutting RC3.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> At some point, if we are not able to move fast on this one, I would
>>>>>> propose to
>>>>>> cut RC3 as it is.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> JB
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 08/02/2017 08:52 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks Eugene for the sumup.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> BEAM-2708 is now fixed.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The last blocking issue for RC3 is BEAM-2671. I spent time today on
>>>> this
>>>>>> one,
>>>>>>> investigating the different issues.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Agree that help from Aviem and Kenn would help for sure.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Aviem already started to kindly take a look on the Jira today.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Clearly, it would be great to fix BEAM-2671 in the coming 36 hours. I
>>>>>> would like
>>>>>>> to submit RC3 to vote tomorrow or the day after (my time).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks !
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> JB
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 08/02/2017 08:24 PM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:
>>>>>>>> We're down to 2 issues.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> BEAM-2670 has been fixed.
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2708 has a fix in review
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is the nasty one
>>> and
>>>> we
>>>>>>>> don't understand it nor have a fix. Help is needed; some people who
>>>>>> could
>>>>>>>> help are +Kenn Knowles <k...@google.com> and +Aviem Zur <
>>>>>> aviem...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>    .
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 6:41 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>>> j...@nanthrax.net
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> We have three open issues for the 2.1.0 that we need to fix before
>>> I
>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>> able to cut RC3:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12340528
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I'm working on BEAM-2671.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Any help is welcome for the two other Jiras (BEAM-2587 and
>>>> BEAM-2670).
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks !
>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>> JB
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version
>>>>>>>>> 2.1.0, 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 "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
>>>>>>>>>> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
>>>>>>>>> reference
>>>>>>>>>> manual [6].
>>>>>>>>>> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to
>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> dist.apache.org [2].
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by
>>>> majority
>>>>>>>>> approval,
>>>>>>>>>> with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> JB
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
>>> projectId=12319527&version=12340528
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
>>>>>>>>>> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
>>>>>>>>>> [4]
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
>>>>>>>>>> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
>>>>>>>>>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>>>>>>> jbono...@apache.org
>>>>>>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>>>>>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>>>> jbono...@apache.org
>>>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>> jbono...@apache.org
>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>> 
>>> 
> 
> -- 
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com

Reply via email to