I can definitely help with binary artifacts, but it'll have to be over the [long] weekend.
Thanks, Roman. On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 8:55 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 12:38AM, Evans Ye wrote: >> It looks like BIGTOP-2318 is not a big deal. >> I'd say go :) > > I'd say so too ;) I will wait a couple more days in case there late votes, > then close the thread and publish the release. I might need help with > signing/publishing the binary artifacts, as I am on 4G cell-link and > transferring a bunch of repos around might not be fast. > > Rvs, you were volunteering IIRC? ;) > > Cos > >> 2016-02-11 0:19 GMT+08:00 Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]>: >> >> > +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 >> > > > > > >> > > > >> >
