https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-10015 is a correctness issue, basically an experimental feature (I hope marked as such) not really working at all. It probably has a fairly small audience for now. I will not -1 because of it but I will -0. If there is another RC this should be included. Reuven probably has a better idea of the overall impact of the bug.
Kenn On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 6:05 PM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: > Please note https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11777 - another bug we > found while trying to upgrade to 2.21 > > Other than that things look good. > > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 4:14 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote: > >> +1 (again, validated with new whl files.) >> >> What about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-10015? Is this a >> blocker? >> >> +Kenneth Knowles <k...@google.com> +Reuven Lax <re...@google.com> -- >> since you are both tagged on the JIRA. >> >> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 4:09 PM Kyle Weaver <kcwea...@google.com> wrote: >> >>> > We *really* need to automate the building and deploying of artifacts, >>> rather than have so many manual steps... >>> >>> Agreed. Luckily building wheels is one of only a couple steps that >>> aren't automated yet. Partially related: >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-9388. >>> >>> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 6:55 PM Luke Cwik <lc...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>> The 2.22 release is also being worked on. Rather allow that release >>>> pick up anything that isn't critical. >>>> >>>> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 3:51 PM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
