Hey all,

Oh my...I did validated the hashes locally - but was using the files and forgot 
to update them in the email. And the docker hash was just remained there.

I was making quite a few mistakes arising from the fact that I needed to do 
some minor changes which didn't affected production code at all...
but eventually I opted to do a small correct commit to master which then was 
cherry-picked to 36....that also meaned I had to restart.

The correct hashes are:
==> apache-druid-36.0.0-bin.tar.gz.sha512 <==
f83b4e2f56e434a01553db3e9e8709cf0f962297f786ca6034106a9fc18689fa70b5f2ea7bd6b46d54f637e81c648f6528ded6e94cb91b21ea3823c18a64b140
==> apache-druid-36.0.0-src.tar.gz.sha512 <==
82708a9c08895041df8ef4bb47d738606db3c7454a17ad1bc84b5145cff02a112b43c332f78026570180b46efe865781be3833476919536b9999ca0658651865

It would be nice to have it a little bit more streamlined; so that its easier 
to do all this.
I'll try to make some tool which could do this for us in the future.

cheers,
Zoltan


On 2/6/26 12:03 AM, Clint Wylie wrote:
actually the source package hash in the email thread also doesn't
match what is in the file either, here it is
d4f78b627e0c46db0d328ce53460ae3f5639831f20efc50ed6c25c5999aa310dd089d4d7813c0994f7c6714a2df24594ab7b14ab087e360bb2fbc5992e6e7293
but in https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/druid/36.0.0-rc1/ it is
82708a9c08895041df8ef4bb47d738606db3c7454a17ad1bc84b5145cff02a112b43c332f78026570180b46efe865781be3833476919536b9999ca0658651865.
The bin package hash matches what is in the artifacts. Not sure where
this source hash came from, since i can't find it in any other email
threads


On Thu, Feb 5, 2026 at 2:57 PM Clint Wylie <[email protected]> wrote:

+1 (binding)

.. pending clarification on docker hash. This email thread has it as
528a78a68b1dde47a5984e60975203d8cdf0bd4f477f8b97b84a8b2b44e3c683,
however dockerhub shows 36 RC1 as different:
https://hub.docker.com/layers/apache/druid/36.0.0-rc1/images/sha256-65f7d09412ca3156bf1a7f13c00d7beed1eff48bda9f287be6d6d1384151669e.
I searched dev list history and I believe maybe you just copied and
pasted a previous voting thread of yours from Druid 33 RC2, which has
the same hash, so I am just assuming this was a mistake.

src package:
* verified checksum and signature
* LICENSE and NOTICE present
* rat check passed
* built release binary package, tested with quickstart configuration
with kafka ingestion, ran some queries

binary package:
* verified checksum and signature
* LICENSE and NOTICE present
* tested with quickstart configuration with MSQ ingestion, ran some queries

docker:
* checksum in email thread does not match tag on dockerhub, which I
see as 65f7d09412ca3156bf1a7f13c00d7beed1eff48bda9f287be6d6d1384151669e
* tested using example docker-compose from source distribution with
MSQ ingestion, ran some queries

On Wed, Feb 4, 2026 at 12:49 PM Rich Bowen <[email protected]> wrote:



On 2026/02/02 20:30:40 Zoltan Haindrich wrote:
Hi all,

I have created a build for Apache Druid 36.0.0, release candidate 1.

...
[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Druid 0.17.0
[ ] 0 I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with the release
[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...

+1 (non-binding)

* Verified signatures and hashes on the following files as per 
https://apache.org/info/verification.html
   - apache-druid-36.0.0-bin.tar.gz (SHA512, GPG signature)
   - apache-druid-36.0.0-src.tar.gz (SHA512, GPG signature)
* Verified LICENSE and NOTICE files

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to