On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > Got it. But don't forget there is a release guide and some manual validation > to perform. A Apache release is not just a script to run, as a release > manager, you are also responsible of the verification (legal, artifacts, etc).
Anything and everything that can be done by a script should be done by a script, such that we humans can focus on the things that only we can do. The release guide should not be a series of commands that must be run exactly in order (with implicit dependencies like silently producing bad artifacts if run from a non-pristine client). > Regards > JB > > On Nov 3, 2017, 17:45, at 17:45, Reuven Lax <re...@google.com.INVALID> wrote: >>What I meant is that there are many manual commands today, which makes >>the >>process more prone to human error at a number of points. I don't think >>we >>need to change the release process, I simply want to script it so that >>the >>release owner has to run fewer commands. >> >>On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> >>wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> If the tag is ok, updated artifacts require a new staging repository. >>So >>> it means the vote email is obsolete. >>> >>> I would cut a clean new rc3 and start a new vote. >>> >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>> On Nov 3, 2017, 16:30, at 16:30, Reuven Lax >><re...@google.com.INVALID> >>> wrote: >>> >Thanks for catching this. >>> > >>> >Do we need new artifacts? Looks like we might just need a new source >>> >drop. >>> > >>> >On Nov 3, 2017 11:27 AM, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <j...@nanthrax.net> >>> >wrote: >>> > >>> >> Probably the cleanup (git clean -x) has not be done before cutting >>> >the >>> >> release. >>> >> >>> >> I would ask a new rc to fix the provided artifacts. >>> >> >>> >> Regards >>> >> JB >>> >> >>> >> On Nov 3, 2017, 15:46, at 15:46, "Ismaël Mejía" >><ieme...@gmail.com> >>> >wrote: >>> >> >I found some issues during the vote validation (not sure if those >>> >> >would require a new vote since most seem to be packaging related >>and >>> >> >we can get with it by removing the extra stuff that ended up in >>the >>> >> >zip files): >>> >> > >>> >> >1. I inspected the apache-beam-2.2.0-source-release.zip file and >>was >>> >a >>> >> >bit surprised to notice that it was twice the size of the one for >>> >the >>> >> >2.1.0 vote, then I discovered that the sdks/python/,eggs >>directory >>> >was >>> >> >part of the 2.2.0 zip file (I suppose this is an issue). >>> >> > >>> >> >2. There are some directories/files that appear in the zip file >>that >>> >> >don't exist in the 2.2.0-rc2 git tag: >>> >> > >>> >> >2.1.1/ >>> >> >foo/ >>> >> >model/ >>> >> >sdks/python/README.md >>> >> > >>> >> >3. Then I run the rat validation and it broke because some files >>> >don't >>> >> >have the correct (I suppose these are generated files that should >>> >not >>> >> >be part of the final distribution). This is a part of the release >>> >> >process that we have done manually and that has bitten us in the >>> >> >latest two releases. >>> >> > >>> >> >[WARNING] Files with unapproved licenses: >>> >> > >>> >sdks/python/apache_beam/portability/api/beam_runner_api_pb2_grpc.py >>> >> > >>sdks/python/apache_beam/portability/api/standard_window_fns_pb2.py >>> >> > sdks/python/apache_beam/portability/api/beam_job_api_pb2.py >>> >> > sdks/python/apache_beam/portability/api/endpoints_pb2.py >>> >> > >>> >>>sdks/python/apache_beam/portability/api/beam_artifact_api_pb2_grpc.py >>> >> > >>sdks/python/apache_beam/portability/api/beam_artifact_api_pb2.py >>> >> > sdks/python/apache_beam/portability/api/beam_fn_api_pb2_grpc.py >>> >> > sdks/python/apache_beam/portability/api/beam_fn_api_pb2.py >>> >> > sdks/python/apache_beam/portability/api/beam_runner_api_pb2.py >>> >> > >>sdks/python/apache_beam/portability/api/beam_provision_api_pb2.py >>> >> > >>sdks/python/apache_beam/portability/api/beam_job_api_pb2_grpc.py >>> >> > sdks/python/apache_beam/portability/api/endpoints_pb2_grpc.py >>> >> > >>> >>>sdks/python/apache_beam/portability/api/beam_provision_api_pb2_grpc.py >>> >> >>> >>>>sdks/python/apache_beam/portability/api/standard_window_fns_pb2_grpc.py >>> >> > >>> >> >On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:47 AM, Reuven Lax >>> ><re...@google.com.invalid> >>> >> >wrote: >>> >> >> Hi everyone, >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the >>version >>> >> >2.2.0, >>> >> >> 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 B98B7708 >>[3], >>> >> >> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central >>Repository >>> >[4], >>> >> >> * source code tag "v2.2.0-RC2" [5], >>> >> >> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the >>> >API >>> >> >> reference manual [6]. >>> >> >> * Java artifacts were built with Maven 3.5.0 and >>OpenJDK/Oracle >>> >JDK >>> >> >> 1.8.0_144. >>> >> >> * 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, >>> >> >> Reuven >>> >> >> >>> >> >> [1] >>> >> >> >>> >> >https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa? >>> >> projectId=12319527&version=12341044 >>> >> >> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.2.0/ >>> >> >> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS >>> >> >> [4] >>> >> >>> >>>>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1022/ >>> >> >> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.2.0-RC2 >>> >> >> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/337 >>> >> >>>
