Re: [VOTE] Release 2.2.0, release candidate #2

Mon, 06 Nov 2017 20:51:07 -0800 

Agree, it's what I did in previous release (with git clean -x as well).

Thanks !
Regards
JB

On 11/07/2017 05:47 AM, Reuven Lax wrote:

As we've done before, I will manually clean up these directories and
regenerate the zip. I don't think there's a need for another RC.

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 8:42 PM, Reuven Lax <[email protected]> wrote:


Actually, I think this is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2271.
Appears we hit this on every release.

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Reuven Lax <[email protected]> wrote:


Yes, if you see anything obvious that would be helpful! I'm getting on a
17-hour flight to Singapore tomorrow, so I would like to have a working RC
out first.

Meanwhile, since they only concern is extra stuff in the source dist, I
think all other verifications can go on (in particular the artifacts
shouldn't be changing).

Reuven

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
wrote:


Hi Reuven,

do you want me to take a look ?

I'm ready to help !

Regards
JB

On 11/05/2017 11:30 PM, Reuven Lax wrote:


Built RC3, however many of these files/directories ended up in the
source
zip again, despite my being careful to run a git clean -x -f this time.
I'm
not sure why, taking a look.

On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Reuven Lax <[email protected]> wrote:

Last time is the charm - it succeeded this time!


On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Reuven Lax <[email protected]> wrote:

BTW, I'm trying one more time.


On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Reuven Lax <[email protected]> wrote:

yes, release:prepare worked fine.


If you're able to do so, that would be great. I don't know the
details
well enough to try and manually upload the artifacts.

On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
[email protected]>
wrote:

I guess that release:prepare step worked fine. So the tag is there.


I can checkout on the tag and upload the artifacts on staging repo
(as
release:perform does).

Regards
JB


On 11/05/2017 08:59 PM, Reuven Lax wrote:

How would I go about doing this? Are there instructions on the

release
guide?

On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
[email protected]



wrote:


It sounds like an issue on Nexus at Apache.



I just checked on status.apache.org and nothing special about
Nexus.

Do you want to try to upload artifacts (and then you can take hand
using
the staging repo) ?

Regards
JB

On 11/05/2017 08:53 PM, Reuven Lax wrote:

Unfortunately all attempts to cut RC03 now fail with



[*INFO*] [ERROR] Failed to execute goal

org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-deploy-plugin:2.8.2:deploy
(default-deploy)
on project beam-examples-java: Failed to deploy artifacts: Could
not
transfer artifact org.apache.beam:beam-examples-
java:jar.asc:javadoc:2.2.0
from/to apache.releases.https (
https://repository.apache.org/service/local/staging/deploy/m
aven2):
Connect
to repository.apache.org:443 [repository.apache.org/207.244
.88.140]
failed:
Operation timed out (Connection timed out) -> [Help 1]


I've tried a few times.

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 9:53 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
[email protected]>
wrote:

I think it's wise, yes.



Regards
JB


On 11/05/2017 02:13 AM, Reuven Lax wrote:

Trying to perform surgery on the source dist looks a bit too
error
prone,

so I think I'll cut an RC3.


On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
[email protected]>
wrote:

Yeah, at least the script can ask for human validation at some
points of

the process (as we do in the release guide).



Regards
JB

On Nov 3, 2017, 18:22, at 18:22, Reuven Lax
<[email protected]>
wrote:

Of course. I don't think we can remove the release manager
from
the

process, but I think I can automate it so that there are at

least
fewer
manual steps for the release manager to perform.

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
[email protected]



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).


Regards
JB

On Nov 3, 2017, 17:45, at 17:45, Reuven Lax

<[email protected]>



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

<[email protected]>




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

<[email protected]>



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" <



[email protected]>

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"

<[email protected]>




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/portab
ility/api/beam_runner_api_pb2_

grpc.py








sdks/python/apache_beam/portab

ility/api/standard_window_fns_





pb2.py






      sdks/python/apache_beam/portab

ility/api/beam_job_api_pb2.py



      sdks/python/apache_beam/porta
bility/api/endpoints_pb2.py








sdks/python/apache_beam/portab
ility/api/beam_artifact_api_




pb2_grpc.py







sdks/python/apache_beam/portab
ility/api/beam_artifact_api_pb


2.py







sdks/python/apache_beam/portab

ility/api/beam_fn_api_pb2_grpc


.py





      sdks/python/apache_beam/portab



ility/api/beam_fn_api_pb2.py





sdks/python/apache_beam/portab

ility/api/beam_runner_api_pb2.py







sdks/python/apache_beam/portab

ility/api/beam_provision_api_p


b2.py







sdks/python/apache_beam/portab

ility/api/beam_job_api_pb2_grp


c.py







sdks/python/apache_beam/portab

ility/api/endpoints_pb2_grpc.py













sdks/python/apache_beam/portab



ility/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






<[email protected]>





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/orgapache


beam-1022/





[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.2.0-RC2






[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/337
















--




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

Reply via email to