On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 04:31PM, Jonathan Kelly wrote: > It seems unlikely that somebody else would have claimed these bucket names, > especially so soon after the Cloudera account was deactivated, so I would > expect that it's more likely that S3 doesn't allow bucket reuse in a > different account for some X amount of time, possibly never. I'm asking > somebody from S3 how this works, as well as asking (as much of a long shot > as it is) whether or not it's possible to recover the data from the old > bucket.
Thanks man - that's be totally GREAT if we can reclaim the bucket back! Or at least, copy the content elsewhere. > ~ Jonathan Kelly > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]> wrote: > > > It might be some sort of name-retention policy in action on AWS part. Ah... > > well, a lesson for the future. > > > > Shall we get the bucket 'asfbigtop' to make it clear in the future? > > Cos > > > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 03:07PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > > > Then unfortunately we should just move on, unless we want to try and get > > it > > > from the current owner (using a trademark claim?). That would be at least > > > time consuming. Want to use one of the buckets I managed to reserve? > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 22, 2015, at 2:58 PM, Sean Mackrory <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Yeah I'm afraid the account is gone, and that bucket is not under any > > other > > > > account in our control. So if the bucket is not available, somebody > > else > > > > must have claimed it. > > > > > > > >> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Evans Ye <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> The best case is that Sean gets back with a news that the bucket is > > still > > > >> managed under Cloudera so that we might be able to backup things out > > and > > > >> then delete the bucket. > > > >> The worst case is someone took bigtop bucket so that we can only put > > 1.0 > > > >> packages in buckets created by Andrew and then update the 1.0 release > > repo > > > >> files. > > > >> > > > >> 2015-10-21 13:39 GMT+08:00 Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]>: > > > >> > > > >>>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 09:00PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > > > >>>> Thanks Evans. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Cos: We do have the option to make new point releases and > > convenience > > > >>> repos > > > >>>> from older code if someone asks, but I suspect there won't be such > > > >>> demand. > > > >>> > > > >>> True, we can. There's already a JIRA about the absence of 0.6 - > > that's > > > >> why > > > >>> I > > > >>> brought up this point. > > > >>> > > > >>> Cos > > > >>> > > > >>>>> On Oct 20, 2015, at 5:25 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]> > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Another part here is that _all_ our historical releases are gone ;( > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> It might be not a huge issue as we clearly encourage our users to > > > >> stay > > > >>> on the > > > >>>>> later stuff, but still it's a blow to the project. One of those > > > >>> non-so-obvious > > > >>>>> things that are very clear when looked upon in the rear-view > > mirror. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Cos > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 02:34AM, Evans Ye wrote: > > > >>>>>> Thanks Andrew! > > > >>>>>> For temporarily dev/test usage, I've built packages back on our CI > > > >>> server: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> http://ci.bigtop.apache.org:8080/view/Releases/ > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> And added some wiki for users: > > > >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BIGTOP/How+to+install+Bigtop+1.0.0+with+Bigtop+Provisioner > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> I think this is enough, if it won't take too long to get bigtop > > > >>> bucket back > > > >>>>>> online. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> OTOH, BIGTOP-2092 < > > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BIGTOP-2092> > > > >>> reveals > > > >>>>>> that all the historical release artifacts are not available as > > well. > > > >>>>>> My thought is to just provide 1.0 release artifacts. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Cos, > > > >>>>>> right now I haven't used up the resource provided by Tom for CI. > > If > > > >>> needed > > > >>>>>> I think we can re-negotiate with Tom for rearrangement to get some > > > >> S3 > > > >>>>>> resources. > > > >>>>>> Anyhow, if you need help, just ping me. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> 2015-10-21 0:22 GMT+08:00 Andrew Purtell <[email protected]>: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> FWIW, I was able to create the following buckets under my > > account: > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> bigtop-repo > > > >>>>>>> bigtop-repos > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> If you want to go with one of these, even if only temporarily, > > let > > > >>> me know > > > >>>>>>> and I'll send the PMC access credentials of an IAM user with full > > > >>> perms > > > >>>>>>> over these buckets. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Sean Mackrory < > > > >> [email protected] > > > >>>> > > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> Sean, could you figure out how this can be done? > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Sure. Although if the bucket ceased to exist when the account > > was > > > >>>>>>>> terminated, the name should have been free again with a couple > > of > > > >>> hours. > > > >>>>>>> So > > > >>>>>>>> either the bucket has NOT ceased to exist, or someone other than > > > >>> Cloudera > > > >>>>>>>> now has the bucket name. > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> I'll find out which... > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Konstantin Boudnik < > > > >>> [email protected]> > > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 03:30PM, Evans Ye wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>> Guys I've a bad news. > > > >>>>>>>>>> I'm guessing that our official released 1.0 repos on S3 are > > also > > > >>> tied > > > >>>>>>>>> with > > > >>>>>>>>>> Cloudera's credentials, which is why we no longer have S3 > > repos > > > >>>>>>>> available > > > >>>>>>>>>> for users to consume now(I've tried centos6 and debian8). > > > >>>>>>>>>> That's really bad in user experience. :( > > > >>>>>>>>>> Cos, > > > >>>>>>>>>> * Could you please confirm where we put 1.0 repos on? > > > >>>>>>>>>> * If my guess is right, do you still have copies of signed > > repos > > > >>> at > > > >>>>>>>> local > > > >>>>>>>>>> for restore? > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> I do have the copy of the repos, so it should be an easy > > exercise > > > >>> to > > > >>>>>>>>> restore > > > >>>>>>>>> them to the new location. > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> * I don't have knowledge of how our current S3 resources are > > > >> being > > > >>>>>>>>> managed. > > > >>>>>>>>>> And we don't have S3 resources available from Tom's team, > > hence > > > >> I > > > >>>>>>> think > > > >>>>>>>>> we > > > >>>>>>>>>> need to plan for this now. > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> Evans > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:53AM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>> Since the binary convenience artifacts are not an official > > > >> release > > > >>>>>>>>> artifact, > > > >>>>>>>>>> only the source tarball is, then any of us can feel free to > > use > > > >>> the > > > >>>>>>>>> official > > > >>>>>>>>>> 1.0 release tarball to generate a new set of packages, store > > > >> them > > > >>> at > > > >>>>>>>> new > > > >>>>>>>>>> locations, and update pointers to that location. > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> The new location *could* be Apache dist. Other projects host > > > >> their > > > >>>>>>>>>> convenience artifacts there. We need to consider the impact on > > > >>>>>>>>>> infrastructure costs. I don't think there would be any > > > >> significant > > > >>>>>>>>> impact. > > > >>>>>>>>>> We could mail infrastructure to find out if they have any > > > >> concerns > > > >>>>>>>> given > > > >>>>>>>>> the > > > >>>>>>>>>> space requirement if you prefer this option. > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> We have discussed it with INFRA in the early days of the > > project. > > > >>> And > > > >>>>>>>>> precisely the cost impact was the reason we have kept it > > > >>> elsewhere. We > > > >>>>>>>> are > > > >>>>>>>>> talking about ~0.7GB/repo x 5 platforms (at least) x number of > > > >>> Apache > > > >>>>>>>>> mirrors > > > >>>>>>>>> - it's pretty huge, really. > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> Bintray is another option. I don't know anything about it. > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> I also looked at creating a S3 bucket for Bigtop using my > > > >>> account. I > > > >>>>>>>>> have a > > > >>>>>>>>>> feeling monthly transfer charges will not be a problem. > > However > > > >>> the > > > >>>>>>>>> 'bigtop' > > > >>>>>>>>>> bucket is taken. Perhaps we could talk to Tom about getting > > > >>> ownership > > > >>>>>>>>>> transferred if you prefer this option. > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> We need to ask Cloudera's infra team to transfer it to us. > > Sean, > > > >>> could > > > >>>>>>>> you > > > >>>>>>>>> figure out how this can be done? > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks! > > > >>>>>>>>> Cos > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 18, 2015, at 4:42 AM, Olaf Flebbe <[email protected]> > > > >> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Cos, > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Is it correct that we should not put our release artifacts on > > > >>>>>>> apache > > > >>>>>>>>> dist, > > > >>>>>>>>>>> since Apache is about code not binaries? > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Can we use something like bintray.org ? Looks like the > > > >>>>>>> functionality > > > >>>>>>>>> we need: RPM and DEB repo, and does have an API. > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Olaf > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Am 18.10.2015 um 09:30 schrieb Evans Ye <[email protected] > > >: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Guys I've a bad news. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm guessing that our official released 1.0 repos on S3 are > > > >> also > > > >>>>>>>> tied > > > >>>>>>>>> with > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Cloudera's credentials, which is why we no longer have S3 > > > >> repos > > > >>>>>>>>> available > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> for users to consume now(I've tried centos6 and debian8). > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> That's really bad in user experience. :( > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Cos, > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> * Could you please confirm where we put 1.0 repos on? > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> * If my guess is right, do you still have copies of signed > > > >> repos > > > >>>>>>> at > > > >>>>>>>>> local > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> for restore? > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> * I don't have knowledge of how our current S3 resources are > > > >>> being > > > >>>>>>>>> managed. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> And we don't have S3 resources available from Tom's team, > > > >> hence > > > >>> I > > > >>>>>>>>> think we > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> need to plan for this now. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Evans > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > >>>>>>> Best regards, > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> - Andy > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - > > Piet > > > >>> Hein > > > >>>>>>> (via Tom White) > > > >> > >
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
