We *really* need to automate the building and deploying of artifacts, rather than have so many manual steps...
The new set of wheels look good now. Verified all the hashes and signatures and source tarball contents as well. Ran a couple of test pipelines. I noticed https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11722 was just merged. Are we OK excluding that? Other than that looks good. +1 (binding) pending the one question above. On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 10:49 AM Kyle Weaver <kcwea...@google.com> wrote: > Nevermind, uploading the wheels to dist.apache.org is part > of ./sign_hash_python_wheels.sh, which I forgot to run. Wheels should be up > to date now, PTAL. > > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 1:27 PM Kyle Weaver <kcwea...@google.com> wrote: > >> > -1, the wheel files seem to be built against the wrong commit. >> >> Thanks for catching that Robert. I had to rebuild the wheels after some >> cherry picks. I validated that the wheels in gs://beam-wheels-staging are >> up to date. They then must not have overwritten the wheels on >> dist.apache.org properly, which I assume we expect the Travis build to >> do. I might have to copy over the new wheels myself. >> >> > Since the current RC has been -1ed maybe we can include BEAM-9887 as >> > part of the next RC, no? >> >> At this point, there is no need to go to a full second RC. If there turn >> out to be blocking issues with RC #1 that necessitate RC #2, we can >> consider including BEAM-9887 then. >> >> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 3:41 AM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Since the current RC has been -1ed maybe we can include BEAM-9887 as >>> part of the next RC, no? >>> It is definitely not a blocker but a nice to have. >>> >>> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 2:26 AM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > -1, the wheel files seem to be built against the wrong commit. E.g. >>> > >>> > unzip -p >>> apache_beam-2.21.0-cp35-cp35m-macosx_10_6_intel.macosx_10_9_intel.macosx_10_9_x86_64.macosx_10_10_intel.macosx_10_10_x86_64.whl >>> apache_beam/runners/worker/bundle_processor.py | head -n 40 >>> > >>> > notice the missing "import bisect" (among other things) missing from >>> https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/release-2.21.0/sdks/python/apache_beam/runners/worker/bundle_processor.py >>> . >>> > >>> > (I do agree that BEAM-9887 isn't severe enough to hold up the release >>> at this point.) >>> > >>> > >>> > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 8:48 PM rahul patwari < >>> rahulpatwari8...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Hi Luke, >>> >> >>> >> The release is not severely broken without PR #11609. >>> >> The PR ensures that, while building a Row with Logical Type, the >>> input value provided is proper. If we take FixedBytes logical type with >>> length 10, for example, the proper input value will be a byte array of >>> length 10. But, without this PR, for FixedBytes logical type, the Row will >>> be built with input value with length less than the expected length. >>> >> But, as long as the input value provided is correct, there shouldn't >>> be any problems. >>> >> I will change the fix version as 2.22.0 for BEAM-9887. >>> >> >>> >> Regards, >>> >> Rahul >>> >> >>> >> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 8:51 AM Luke Cwik <lc...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Rahul, do you believe that the release is severely broken without >>> PR/11609 enough to require another release candidate or would waiting till >>> 2.22 (which is due to be cut tomorrow)? >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 8:13 PM rahul patwari < >>> rahulpatwari8...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Hi, >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Can the PR: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11609 be >>> cherry-picked for 2.21.0 release? >>> >>>> If not, the fix version has to be changed for BEAM-9887. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Regards, >>> >>>> Rahul >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 6:05 AM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> +1, I validated python 2 and 3 quickstarts. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 4:57 PM Hannah Jiang < >>> hannahji...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> I confirmed that licenses/notices/source code are added to Java >>> and Python docker images as expected. >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 2:36 PM Kyle Weaver <kcwea...@google.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Thanks for bringing that up Steve. I'll leave it to others to >>> vote on whether that necessitates an RC #2. >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 5:22 PM Steve Niemitz < >>> sniem...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-10015 was marked as >>> 2.21 but isn't in the RC1 tag. It's marked as P1, and seems like the >>> implication is that without the fix, pipelines can produce incorrect data. >>> Is this a blocker? >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> +Reuven Lax, would this be a release blocker? >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 4:51 PM Kyle Weaver < >>> kcwea...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> Hi everyone, >>> >>>>>>>>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the >>> version 2.21.0, 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 >>> F11E37D7F006D086232876797B6D6673C79AEA72 [3], >>> >>>>>>>>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository >>> [4], >>> >>>>>>>>> * source code tag "v2.21.0-RC1" [5], >>> >>>>>>>>> * website pull request listing the release [6], publishing the >>> API reference manual [7], and the blog post [8]. >>> >>>>>>>>> * Java artifacts were built with Maven 3.6.3 and >>> OpenJDK/Oracle JDK 1.8.0. >>> >>>>>>>>> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release >>> to the dist.apache.org [2]. >>> >>>>>>>>> * Validation sheet with a tab for 2.21.0 release to help with >>> validation [9]. >>> >>>>>>>>> * Docker images published to Docker Hub [10]. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by >>> majority approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>> >>>>>>>>> Kyle >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> [1] >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12347143 >>> >>>>>>>>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.21.0/ >>> >>>>>>>>> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS >>> >>>>>>>>> [4] >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1103/ >>> >>>>>>>>> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/releases/tag/v2.21.0-RC1 >>> >>>>>>>>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11727 >>> >>>>>>>>> [7] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/603 >>> >>>>>>>>> [8] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11729 >>> >>>>>>>>> [9] >>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qk-N5vjXvbcEk68GjbkSZTR8AGqyNUM-oLFo_ZXBpJw/edit#gid=275707202 >>> >>>>>>>>> [10] https://hub.docker.com/search?q=apache%2Fbeam&type=image >>> >>
