+1

the RC1 looks good besides of the extra file issue already fixed on master

I am not sure how to proceed with this. Shall we consider the original [VOTE]
thread valid and simply call the tally? Or there's a feeling that we need to
restart to vote and make it more formal than it is right now?

Cos

On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 11:56PM, Evans Ye wrote:
> I think it's OK to just update the KEYS file.
> 
> 
> Here's my evaluation result of 1.1.0 RC1:
> 
> 1. sha1, md5, signature verified
> 2. build bigtop/slaves 1.1.0 images
> 3. use above 1.1.0 slave images to build 1.1.0 packages
> 4. run Docker Provisioner to deploy 1.1.0 packages
> 5. run Vagrant Provisioner to deploy 1.1.0 packages
> 6. run hadoop and pig smoke tests
> 7. run hadoop itest
> 
> Surely I didn't cover all the features, but the core feature I touched all
> works well.
> Hence here's my +1 to the RC1.
> 
> 
> 2016-02-07 15:23 GMT+08:00 Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]>:
> 
> > Argh... the keys again. CB588E12 is one of my subs, but it is DSA key and
> > we
> > had a lot of troubles with the RPMs (because RPM only works with "secure"
> > RSA
> > keys). Eventually, for package signing I've used FA08B173, which is a part
> > of
> > the KEYS file.
> >
> > Technically, speaking there's no rule dictating to sign release artifacts
> > and
> > binary package with the same key. So, if having two keys is ok, then I will
> > need to add CB588E12 to the KEYS as well. Or alternatively, I (or someone
> > else) would need to do RC2 with correct signature.
> >
> > Cos
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 03:15PM, Evans Ye wrote:
> > > Hi Olaf, did you get the key from keyserver?
> > >
> > > $  gpg --verify bigtop-1.1.0-project.tar.gz.asc
> > bigtop-1.1.0-project.tar.gz
> > > gpg: Signature made Sun Jan 31 12:09:46 2016 CST using DSA key ID
> > CB588E12
> > > gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found
> > >
> > > $ gpg --keyserver pgpkeys.mit.edu --recv-key CB588E12  # Took a while to
> > > finish
> > >
> > > $ gpg --verify bigtop-1.1.0-project.tar.gz.asc
> > bigtop-1.1.0-project.tar.gz
> > > gpg: Signature made Sun Jan 31 12:09:46 2016 CST using DSA key ID
> > CB588E12
> > > gpg: Good signature from "Konstantin I Boudnik (Cos) <[email protected]>"
> > > gpg:                 aka "Konstantin I Boudnik (Cos) <[email protected]>"
> > > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
> > > gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the
> > > owner.
> > > Primary key fingerprint: 2CAC 8312 4870 D885 8616  6115 220F 6980 1F27
> > E622
> > >      Subkey fingerprint: 88C5 8332 D1A9 6A83 F9B3  2776 7A7C 8596 CB58
> > 8E12
> > >
> > >
> > > 2016-02-05 17:01 GMT+08:00 Olaf Flebbe <[email protected]>:
> > >
> > > > hi,
> > > >
> > > > the signature file is made with a key CB588E12 , not contained in KEYS.
> > > > Or missed I something important?
> > > >
> > > > Olaf
> > > >
> > > > > Am 31.01.2016 um 05:35 schrieb Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]>:
> > > > >
> > > > > This is the vote for release 1.1.0 of Apache Bigtop.
> > > > >
> > > > > It fixes the following issues:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12311420&version=12329714
> > > > >
> > > > > The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on
> > > > Wednesday,
> > > > > February 3rd, 2016 at noon PDT. Please download, test and vote with
> > > > >
> > > > > [ ] +1, accept rc1 as the official 1.1.0 release of Apache Bigtop
> > > > > [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> > > > > [ ] -1, do not accept rc1 as the official 1.1.0 release of Apache
> > > > Bigtop, because...
> > > > >
> > > > > Source and binary files:
> > > > >  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/bigtop/1.1.0-rc1
> > > > >
> > > > > Maven staging repo:
> > > > >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebigtop-1006
> > > > >
> > > > > The git tag to be voted upon is release-1.1.0
> > > > >
> > > > > Bigtop's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > > > >  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/bigtop/KEYS
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > >  Cos
> > > >
> >

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to