Hi,

I would like to merge RabbitMqIO (we are doing the final touches) and we
have an issue about ParquetIO on HDFS/S3 that I would like to
investigate with the team.

I plan to start the release process asap, hopefully later today.

Regards
JB

On 29/05/2018 23:00, Ahmet Altay wrote:
> 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
> <mailto: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 <mailto: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
>         1AA8CF92D409A73393D0B736BFF2EE42C8282E76
>         gpg: Good signature from "Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>         <jbono...@apache.org <mailto: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
>         <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>
>         > <mailto:lc...@google.com <mailto:lc...@google.com>>> wrote:
>         >
>         >     I believe JB is referring
>         >     to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-4060
>         <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>
>         >     <mailto: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>
>         <mailto: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>>
>         >             > <mailto: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>
>         <mailto:jbono...@apache.org <mailto:jbono...@apache.org>>
>         >             http://blog.nanthrax.net
>         >             Talend - http://www.talend.com
>         >
> 
>         -- 
>         --
>         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

Reply via email to