Thank you JB for the update. Could we start the release process now? Is there anyway I could help with moving the release forward?
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 8:19 AM, Lukasz Cwik <lc...@google.com> wrote: > Thanks for the update JB. > > Kenn, we have the post commit integration tests which run against shaded > artifacts like validates runner. We also have the nightly snapshot and its > verification run which validates the nightly snapshot with DirectRunner / > Dataflow / Apex / Spark / Flink for WordCount and DirectRunner / Dataflow > for the mobile gaming examples. > > I'm not sure about the IOs and whether the perfkit benchmark work > adequately covers them. > > > On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 1:28 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > >> Hi Luke, >> >> I tested the following build: >> >> ./gradlew publishToMavenLocal -PisRelease --no-parallel >> >> The artifacts are present in my .m2/repository. >> >> For instance, I can see: >> >> .m2/repository/org/apache/beam/beam-sdks-java-core/2.5.0$ ls -l >> total 16256 >> beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0.jar >> beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0.jar.asc >> beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-javadoc.jar >> beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-javadoc.jar.asc >> beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0.pom >> beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0.pom.asc >> beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-sources.jar >> beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-sources.jar.asc >> beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-tests.jar >> beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-tests.jar.asc >> beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-test-sources.jar >> beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-test-sources.jar.asc >> >> 1. The signatures are OK: >> >> gpg --verify beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0.jar.asc >> beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0.jar >> gpg: Signature made jeu. 24 mai 2018 16:55:11 CEST >> gpg: using RSA key 1AA8CF92D409A73393D0B736BFF2EE >> 42C8282E76 >> gpg: Good signature from "Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jbono...@apache.org>" >> [unknown] >> >> 2. The pom looks correct to me but it's not optimal because >> >> 2.1. There's no parent definition, so each pom duplicate the same >> configurations (like scm, license, etc) >> 2.2. There's no Maven plugin configuration, even if it's not used for >> the build, other tools can parse and use plugin configuration (like the >> source/target version, etc). >> >> So, even if it's not optimal, the pom looks overall good. >> >> I think it makes sense to move forward on the release as it is right now. >> >> If there's no objection, I will start the release process during the >> week end. >> >> By the way, it would be good to verify that the Maven build is still >> working. Ismaël and I fixed new issues on the Maven build. >> At some point, after the 2.5.0 release, we have to state to remove the >> Maven build (after a vote ;)). >> >> Thanks, >> Regards >> JB >> >> >> On 25/05/2018 01:34, Lukasz Cwik wrote: >> > The license inclusion issue that was brought up on the thread has been >> > resolved https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-4393. >> > >> > JB, you find any other release related issues? >> > >> > On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:33 AM Lukasz Cwik <lc...@google.com >> > <mailto:lc...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >> > I believe JB is referring >> > to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-4060 >> > >> > On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:16 AM Scott Wegner <sweg...@google.com >> > <mailto:sweg...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >> > J.B., can you give any context on what metadata is missing? Is >> > there a JIRA? >> > >> > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 9:30 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > <j...@nanthrax.net <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > The build was OK yesterday but the maven-metadata is still >> > missing. >> > >> > That's the point to fix before being able to move forward >> > on the release. >> > >> > I gonna tackle this later today. >> > >> > Regards >> > JB >> > >> > On 05/18/2018 02:41 AM, Ahmet Altay wrote: >> > > Hi JB and all, >> > > >> > > I wanted to follow up on my previous email. The python >> > streaming issue I >> > > mentioned is resolved and removed from the blocker list. >> > Blocker list is empty >> > > now. You can go ahead with the release branch cut when you >> > are ready. >> > > >> > > Thank you, >> > > Ahmet >> > > >> > > >> > > On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 8:43 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > <j...@nanthrax.net <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net> >> > > <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>>> wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi guys, >> > > >> > > just to let you know that the build fully passed on my >> > box. >> > > >> > > I'm testing the artifacts right now. >> > > >> > > Regards >> > > JB >> > > >> > > On 06/04/2018 10:48, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi guys, >> > > >> > > Apache Beam 2.4.0 has been released on March 20th. >> > > >> > > According to our cycle of release (roughly 6 >> > weeks), we should think >> > > about 2.5.0. >> > > >> > > I'm volunteer to tackle this release. >> > > >> > > I'm proposing the following items: >> > > >> > > 1. We start the Jira triage now, up to Tuesday >> > > 2. I would like to cut the release on Tuesday >> > night (Europe time) >> > > 2bis. I think it's wiser to still use Maven for >> > this release. Do you >> > > think we >> > > will be ready to try a release with Gradle ? >> > > >> > > After this release, I would like a discussion >> about: >> > > 1. Gradle release (if we release 2.5.0 with Maven) >> > > 2. Isolate release cycle per Beam part. I think it >> > would be interesting >> > > to have >> > > different release cycle: SDKs, DSLs, Runners, IOs. >> > That's another >> > > discussion, I >> > > will start a thread about that. >> > > >> > > Thoughts ? >> > > >> > > Regards >> > > JB >> > > >> > > >> > >> > -- >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > jbono...@apache.org <mailto: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 >> >
