I went ahead and took over all the bugs and did the cherrypicks for the remaining backports targeting 2.7.1: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=statusCategory%20%3D%20new%20AND%20project%20%3D%2012319527%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%2012344458
The tests are not healthy. I have not had time to look into the issues. I would appreciate some help reviewing and/or manually running tests and publishing gradle build scans. Kenn On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 3:08 AM Maximilian Michels <[email protected]> wrote: > Created an up-to-date version of the Flink backports for 2.7.1: > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8787 > > Some of the Gradle task names have changed which makes testing via Jenkins > hard. Will have to run them manually before merging. > > -Max > > On 06.06.19 17:41, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Re-raising this thread. I got busy for the last month, and also did not > > want to overlap the 2.13.0 release process. Now I want to pick up 2.7.1 > > again. > > > > Can everyone check on any bug they have targeted to 2.7.1 [1] and get > > the backports merged to release-2.7.1 and the tickets resolved? > > > > Kenn > > > > [1] > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20BEAM%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.7.1%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20DESC > > > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 11:19 AM Ahmet Altay <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > I agree with both keeping 2.7.x going until a new LTS is declared > > and declaring LTS spost-release after some use. 2.12 might actually > > be a good candidate, with multiple RCs/validations it presumably is > > well tested. We can consider that after it gets some real world use. > > > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 6:29 AM Robert Bradshaw <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > IIRC, there was some talk on making 2.12 the next LTS, but the > > consensus is to decide on a LTS after having had some experience > > with > > it, not at or before the release itself. > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 3:04 PM Alexey Romanenko > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: > > > > > > Thanks for working on this, Kenn. > > > > > > Perhaps, I missed this but has it been already > > discussed/decided what will be the next LTS release? > > > > > > On 26 Apr 2019, at 08:02, Kenneth Knowles <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > Since it is all trivially reversible if there is some other > > feeling about this thread, I have gone ahead and started the > work: > > > > > > - I made release-2.7.1 branch point to the same commit as > > release-2.7.0 so there is something to target PRs > > > - I have opened the first PR, cherry-picking the set_version > > script and using it to set the version on the branch to 2.7.1: > > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8407 (found bug in the new > > script right away :-) > > > > > > Here is the release with list of issues: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12344458. > > So anyone can grab a ticket and volunteer to open a backport PR > > to the release-2.7.1 branch. > > > > > > I don't have a strong opinion about how long we should > > support the 2.7.x line. I am curious about different > > perspectives on user / vendor needs. I have two very basic > > thoughts: (1) we surely need to keep it going until some time > > after we have another LTS designated, to make sure there is a > > clear path for anyone only using LTS releases and (2) if we > > decide to end support of 2.7.x but then someone volunteers to > > backport and release, of course I would not expect anyone to > > block them, so it has no maximum lifetime, but we just need > > consensus on a minimum. And of course that consensus cannot > > force anyone to do the work, but is just a resolution of the > > community. > > > > > > Kenn > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 10:29 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > >> > > >> +1 it sounds good to me. > > >> > > >> Thanks ! > > >> > > >> Regards > > >> JB > > >> > > >> On 26/04/2019 02:42, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > > >> > Hi all, > > >> > > > >> > Since the release of 2.7.0 we have identified some serious > > bugs: > > >> > > > >> > - There are 8 (non-dupe) issues* tagged with Fix Version > > 2.7.1 > > >> > - 2 are rated "Blocker" (aka P0) but I think the others > > may be underrated > > >> > - If you know of a critical bug that is not on that list, > > please file > > >> > an LTS backport ticket for it > > >> > > > >> > If a user is on an old version and wants to move to the > > LTS, there are > > >> > some real blockers. I propose that we perform a 2.7.1 > > release starting now. > > >> > > > >> > I volunteer to manage the release. What do you think? > > >> > > > >> > Kenn > > >> > > > >> > *Some are "resolved" but this is not accurate as the LTS > > 2.7.1 branch is > > >> > not created yet. I suggest filing a ticket to track just > > the LTS > > >> > backport when you hit a bug that merits it. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
