Pardon, that git ref I failed to include below is commit 677ed9ef89 (HEAD -> branch-1)
On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 12:14 PM Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for clarifying that this is not a foundation wide policy. It is my > personal policy to cancel a vote whenever there is a veto, if the reason is > sound and technical and, presumably, repeatable, at least in the voter's > environment(s). > > Circling back to the main topic, a unit test run of latest branch-1 (git > ref) completed successfully on my dev host. Based on this result, I would > release it. I'll include details on my environment below. > > It is my theory that the reason some environments observe flaky unit test > failures and others don't is there are occasional unexpected interactions > between various units when surefire executes them concurrently, and the > order in which unit tests are run is dependent on how the underlying OS's > readdir() call orders directory entries, and this will vary from host to > host and even from checkout to checkout. > > My dev host details > > apurtell$ uname -a > Darwin HOSTNAME 17.7.0 Darwin Kernel Version 17.7.0: Thu Dec 20 21:47:19 > PST 2018; root:xnu-4570.71.22~1/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64 > > apurtell$ mvn -v > Apache Maven 3.6.0 (97c98ec64a1fdfee7767ce5ffb20918da4f719f3; > 2018-10-24T11:41:47-07:00) > Maven home: /usr/local/Cellar/maven/3.6.0/libexec > Java version: 1.8.0_172, vendor: Azul Systems, Inc., runtime: > /Users/apurtell/tools/Darwin/jdk/openjdk1.8.0_172_x64/jre > Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: UTF-8 > OS name: "mac os x", version: "10.13.6", arch: "x86_64", family: "mac" > > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 11:11 AM Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Just as a point of clarification, -1 votes on releases aren't vetos. ASF >> policy requires release votes to be majority. >> >> As release manager it's your perogative to cancel a vote for whatever >> reason, but I don't want future RMs thinking they have to fail the vote >> once there's a -1. >> >> On Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 12:18 Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > I put back "1.6.0" for TinyLFU backport to branch-1, which I don't think >> > can happen in the near term because it depends on improvements to >> precommit >> > being in place first. >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 9:37 AM Andrew Purtell < >> [email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > A helpful view for tracking 1.5.0 issues is >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/HBASE/versions/12340316 . >> > > >> > > I deleted fixversions "1.5.1" and "1.6.0" and had JIRA rewrite them >> back >> > > to "1.5.0" so you won't be confused by JIRA thinking 1.5.0 is in >> released >> > > state. All open and pending branch-1 work has the "1.5.0" fix version >> > > again, until we try again for a release at some future time. >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 9:10 AM Andrew Purtell < >> [email protected] >> > > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > >> I have tried to release four 1.5.0 candidates from head of branch-1. >> > >> >> > >> Some veto votes were cast for compatibility issues. This was fine. >> > >> >> > >> Others are for unit test results that do not reproduce locally for >> me. I >> > >> do not have the ability or bandwidth to fix tests which do not fail >> > >> reliably for me. So let me appeal to the community. If you find a >> > >> repeatable test failure on branch-1 please file a JIRA and fix it. >> > >> >> > >> As things stand now I am pausing any attempts to make more 1.5.0 >> > release >> > >> candidates until the community steps forward to clean up its code. >> As an >> > >> alternative I may start aggressively disabling unit tests which do >> not >> > fail >> > >> for me but have been reported in on candidate vote vetoes. Otherwise >> it >> > is >> > >> impossible to make forward progress. >> > >> >> > >> Thank you for your attention. >> >
