Python precommit cron job ( https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Beam/view/PostCommit/job/beam_PreCommit_Python_Cron/) seems to be healthy. Could you share one of the PRs that you noticed the flakiness, I would be interested in debugging.
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 12:25 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@google.com> wrote: > I've seen many PRs that I am reviewing with flakiness problems in the > python precommit IT. Anyone have any insights? > > Kenn > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 12:23 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@google.com> wrote: > >> Thanks for the reminder. I was reading from >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12344540. RC1 also >> gated on clearing >> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+base%3Arelease-2.10.0 >> . >> >> Kenn >> >> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 9:44 AM Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>> What about the revert of "Parse SDK-unknown pipeline options"? >>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7564 >>> >>> Should we merge this for the release? >>> >>> On 23.01.19 11:56, Scott Wegner wrote: >>> > Cherry-pick PR for the last-remaining issue: >>> > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7603 >>> > >>> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 7:15 AM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org >>> > <mailto:k...@apache.org>> wrote: >>> > >>> > The last remaining issue is split into a non-blocker and a revert >>> that is >>> > confirmed to fix the issue. >>> > >>> > Once https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7600 is merged and >>> cherry-picked, I >>> > will cut RC1 today. >>> > >>> > Kenn >>> > >>> > On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 6:03 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org >>> > <mailto:k...@apache.org>> wrote: >>> > >>> > OK. There is just one release blocker remaining; >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6354 >>> > >>> > I have no insights yet, but I am bisecting. It was healthy in >>> 2.9.0. >>> > >>> > Kenn >>> > >>> > On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 9:38 AM Scott Wegner < >>> sweg...@google.com >>> > <mailto:sweg...@google.com>> wrote: >>> > >>> > The rollback for BEAM-6352 is now in and cherry-picked >>> into the >>> > release branch. >>> > >>> > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 9:04 AM Scott Wegner < >>> sc...@apache.org >>> > <mailto:sc...@apache.org>> wrote: >>> > >>> > For BEAM-6352, I have a rollback ready for review: >>> > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7540 >>> > Conversation about the decision to rollback vs. >>> roll-forward for >>> > this change is on the JIRA issue. >>> > >>> > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 8:22 AM Maximilian Michels >>> > <m...@apache.org <mailto:m...@apache.org>> wrote: >>> > >>> > I've created the revert for the pipeline options >>> parsing >>> > which we agreed on: >>> > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7564 >>> > >>> > On 17.01.19 15:16, Maximilian Michels wrote: >>> > > An issue with the Flink Runner when restarting >>> streaming >>> > pipelines: >>> > > https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6460 >>> > > >>> > > Looks like it will be easy to fix by >>> invalidating the >>> > Jackson cache. >>> > > >>> > > -Max >>> > > >>> > > On 16.01.19 23:00, Kenneth Knowles wrote: >>> > >> Quick update on this. There are three >>> remaining issues: >>> > >> >>> > >> - >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6407: A >>> > DirectRunner self-check >>> > >> was broken from 2.8.0 to 2.9.0 - PR looks good >>> modulo >>> > our infra flakes >>> > >> - >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6354: >>> > PAssert + DirectRunner + >>> > >> Unbounded data busted? Investigation not >>> started >>> > >> - >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6352: >>> > Watch was broken from >>> > >> 2.8.0 to 2.9.0 - will rollback if no forward >>> fix by the >>> > time everything else >>> > >> is resolved >>> > >> >>> > >> Kenn >>> > >> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 6:00 AM Kenneth Knowles >>> > <k...@apache.org <mailto:k...@apache.org> >>> > >> <mailto:k...@apache.org <mailto: >>> k...@apache.org>>> wrote: >>> > >> >>> > >> Thanks, Ismaël! >>> > >> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 2:13 AM Ismaël >>> Mejía >>> > <ieme...@gmail.com <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com> >>> > >> <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com >>> > <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com>>> wrote: >>> > >> >>> > >> Ok since there were not many issues I >>> did the >>> > 'update' for the >>> > >> misplaced issues to version 2.10. We >>> are good to >>> > go. New resolved >>> > >> issues in master musg go now into >>> 2.11.0 >>> > >> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 10:38 AM >>> Ismaël Mejía >>> > <ieme...@gmail.com <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com> >>> > >> <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com >>> > <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com>>> wrote: >>> > >> > >>> > >> > This means that the tickets >>> resolved and >>> > marked for 2.11 since January >>> > >> > 2 should be reviewed and >>> retargetted to >>> > version 2.10. >>> > >> > So this is a call for action for >>> committers >>> > who have merged fixes >>> > >> > after the cut to update the tickets >>> if required. >>> > >> > >>> > >> > Ismaël >>> > >> > >>> > >> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:22 PM >>> Kenneth >>> > Knowles <k...@apache.org <mailto:k...@apache.org> >>> > >> <mailto:k...@apache.org >>> > <mailto:k...@apache.org>>> wrote: >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > As a heads up, I did not realize >>> that the >>> > release guide specified a >>> > >> custom process for starting a release >>> branch. It >>> > makes sense; >>> > >> cut_release_branch.sh consolidates >>> knowledge >>> > about all the places the >>> > >> version is hardcoded in the codebase. >>> To keep >>> > the history simple, I will >>> > >> re-cut the release branch at the point >>> where >>> > master moved from >>> > >> 2.10.0-SNAPSHOT to 2.11.0-SNAPSHOT. >>> All PRs to >>> > the branch have been >>> > >> cherry-picked from master, so they >>> will all be >>> > incorporated without any >>> > >> action by their authors. >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > Kenn >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:31 AM >>> Kenneth >>> > Knowles <k...@google.com <mailto:k...@google.com> >>> > >> <mailto:k...@google.com <mailto: >>> k...@google.com>>> >>> > wrote: >>> > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> I'm on it. >>> > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 8:10 AM >>> Ismaël >>> > Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com >>> > >>> > >> <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com >>> > <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com>>> wrote: >>> > >> > >>> >>> > >> > >>> There is also another issue, >>> after the >>> > 2.10.0 branch cut some >>> > >> > >>> identifier in the build was not >>> changed >>> > and the Apache Beam >>> > >> Snapshots >>> > >> > >>> keep generating SNAPSHOTS for >>> 2.10.0 >>> > instead of the now current >>> > >> > >>> 2.11.0-SNAPSHOT. Can somebody >>> PTAL? >>> > >> > >>> >>> > >> > >>> On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 6:17 PM >>> Maximilian >>> > Michels <m...@apache.org <mailto:m...@apache.org> >>> > >> <mailto:m...@apache.org <mailto: >>> m...@apache.org>>> >>> > wrote: >>> > >> > >>> > >>> > >> > >>> > Thanks for driving this Kenn! >>> I'm in >>> > favor of a strict cut off, >>> > >> but I'd like to >>> > >> > >>> > propose a week for >>> cherry-picking >>> > relevant changes to the >>> > >> release branch. It >>> > >> > >>> > looks like many people are >>> returning >>> > from holidays or are still >>> > >> off. >>> > >> > >>> > >>> > >> > >>> > Cheers, >>> > >> > >>> > Max >>> > >> > >>> > >>> > >> > >>> > On 02.01.19 17:20, Kenneth >>> Knowles wrote: >>> > >> > >>> > > Done. I've created the Jira >>> tag for >>> > 2.11.0. >>> > >> > >>> > > >>> > >> > >>> > > Previously, there was a few >>> days >>> > warning to get things in >>> > >> before the branch is >>> > >> > >>> > > cut. You can just >>> cherry-pick them. >>> > This is a bit better for >>> > >> release stability >>> > >> > >>> > > by avoiding all the other >>> changes on >>> > master. The timing of >>> > >> the cut is always >>> > >> > >>> > > going to include older and >>> newer >>> > changes anyhow. >>> > >> > >>> > > >>> > >> > >>> > > Kenn >>> > >> > >>> > > >>> > >> > >>> > > On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 1:08 >>> PM Ismaël >>> > Mejía >>> > >> <ieme...@gmail.com <mailto: >>> ieme...@gmail.com> >>> > <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com <mailto: >>> ieme...@gmail.com>> >>> > >> > >>> > > <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com >>> > <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com> <mailto: >>> ieme...@gmail.com >>> > <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com>>>> wrote: >>> > >> > >>> > > >>> > >> > >>> > > Can you please create >>> 2.11 tag in >>> > JIRA so we can move the >>> > >> JIRAs that >>> > >> > >>> > > are not blocking. I >>> have quite a >>> > bunch of pending code >>> > >> reviews that >>> > >> > >>> > > hoped to get into this >>> one but >>> > well now probably they >>> > >> shall wait. (My >>> > >> > >>> > > excuses for the people >>> who may be >>> > impacted, I had not >>> > >> checked that the >>> > >> > >>> > > date was in the first >>> week). >>> > >> > >>> > > >>> > >> > >>> > > On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at >>> 4:45 PM >>> > 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: >>> > >> > >>> > > > >>> > >> > >>> > > > It sounds good to me. >>> > >> > >>> > > > >>> > >> > >>> > > > Regards >>> > >> > >>> > > > JB >>> > >> > >>> > > > >>> > >> > >>> > > > On 02/01/2019 16:16, >>> Kenneth >>> > Knowles wrote: >>> > >> > >>> > > > > Hi All, >>> > >> > >>> > > > > >>> > >> > >>> > > > > According to the >>> release >>> > calendar [1] branch cut >>> > >> date for >>> > >> > >>> > > > > Beam 2.10.0 >>> release is >>> > today, 2019 January 2. I'd >>> > >> like to volunteer to >>> > >> > >>> > > > > manage this >>> release. Does >>> > anyone have any reason we >>> > >> should not release >>> > >> > >>> > > > > on schedule? >>> > >> > >>> > > > > >>> > >> > >>> > > > > Otherwise, if you >>> know of >>> > release-blocking bugs, >>> > >> please mark their "Fix >>> > >> > >>> > > > > Version" as 2.10.0 >>> and they >>> > will show up in the >>> > >> burndown [2]. If you own >>> > >> > >>> > > > > a bug currently in >>> the >>> > burndown, please double-check >>> > >> if it is truly >>> > >> > >>> > > > > release-blocking. >>> > >> > >>> > > > > >>> > >> > >>> > > > > I've gone ahead >>> and cut a >>> > release-2.10.0 branch from >>> > >> the current master, >>> > >> > >>> > > > > since it is green. >>> If it >>> > turns out to be an >>> > >> inauspicious starting point, >>> > >> > >>> > > > > we can always >>> reset it. >>> > >> > >>> > > > > >>> > >> > >>> > > > > Kenn >>> > >> > >>> > > > > >>> > >> > >>> > > > > [1] >>> > >> > >>> > > >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >>> https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=0p73sl034k80oob7seouanigd0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America%2FLos_Angeles >>> > >>> > >> >>> > >> > >>> > > > > [2] >>> > >> >>> > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12344540 >>> > >> > >>> > > > >>> > >> > >>> > > > -- >>> > >> > >>> > > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>> > >> > >>> > > > jbono...@apache.org >>> > <mailto:jbono...@apache.org> <mailto: >>> jbono...@apache.org >>> > <mailto:jbono...@apache.org>> >>> > >> <mailto:jbono...@apache.org >>> > <mailto:jbono...@apache.org> <mailto: >>> jbono...@apache.org >>> > <mailto:jbono...@apache.org>>> >>> > >> > >>> > > > >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>> > >> > >>> > > > Talend - >>> http://www.talend.com >>> > >> > >>> > > >>> > >> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > Got feedback? tinyurl.com/swegner-feedback >>> > <https://tinyurl.com/swegner-feedback> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > Got feedback? tinyurl.com/swegner-feedback >>> > <https://tinyurl.com/swegner-feedback> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > Got feedback? tinyurl.com/swegner-feedback < >>> https://tinyurl.com/swegner-feedback> >>> >>
