> > Even for branch-2.4, we can start placing links into the file, at the top, > leaving the output of the prior process in place below. I think it is fine > to make this change everywhere. Curious what others think. > Sounds ok to me.
Regarding CHANGES.md content, it's listing HBASE-26826 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26826> (the SFT backport to branch-2.5) under the "OTHER" section. Just wondering if we should move it to "NEW FEATURE", or maybe add HBASE-26067 (the original SFT parent jira) under the "NEW FEATURES" section? Or is this actually intentional, considering SFT is experimental? Finally, we have a fresh new SFT bug fix in HBASE-27017, is it too late for a commit into branch-2.5? Em qui., 2 de jun. de 2022 às 19:55, Huaxiang Sun <[email protected]> escreveu: > +1 to make the change everywhere. Sometimes, there is a need to update the > release field after jira is released (in theory, it should not happen). > > Thanks > Huaxiang > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 10:56 AM Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Even for branch-2.4, we can start placing links into the file, at the > top, > > leaving the output of the prior process in place below. I think it is > fine > > to make this change everywhere. Curious what others think. > > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 10:54 AM Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > I see, that would be totally fine with me if we just do the link > instead > > > of generating the files every time. > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 9:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Oh, wait a minute. IIRC we have a consensus to use the jira page as > > >> release > > >> note instead of committing a file to the repo? The problem is that, > > >> sometimes we just missed something in CHANGES.md or RELEASENOTES.md, > no > > >> actually code change, but since we have committed these files to our > git > > >> repo, we have to sink the RC and generate a new one. > > >> > > >> IIRC for making the two alpha releases for 3.0.0, I have already > started > > >> to > > >> link the jira page instead of CHANGES.md and RELEASENOTES.md. Maybe we > > >> could just remove these steps from the create release scripts? But > maybe > > >> for branch-2.4 we still need to use these steps... > > >> > > >> Thanks. > > >> > > >> Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> 于2022年6月2日周四 22:56写道： > > >> > > >> > I just noticed the release notes issue on the branch last evening. > > Let’s > > >> > add the spotless application to the release note generation step in > > >> > create-release at least or it will keep happening. The RM does not > > get a > > >> > chance to intervene. The script uses the RM credentials to commit > > >> > immediately after generating the files. > > >> > > > >> > > On Jun 2, 2022, at 5:31 AM, 张铎 <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > Oh, I think we should include HBASE-27023, it fixes the license > > issue > > >> > after > > >> > > we apply the spotless formatter where it will add the license > header > > >> > > automatically. > > >> > > > > >> > > And also, it seems that the generated RELEASENOTE.md will > introduce > > >> some > > >> > > lines ending with whitespace, then it will cause pre commit build > > >> > failure. > > >> > > > > >> > > I think we should run a spotless:apply before committing the files > > in > > >> the > > >> > > release scripts, and maybe we should also add spotless:check in > the > > >> mvn > > >> > > verify stage so it will also fail the mvn install command, which > > will > > >> let > > >> > > developers pay more attention on it. > > >> > > > > >> > > Let me open an issue to land these changes. > > >> > > > > >> > > 张铎(Duo Zhang) <[email protected]> 于2022年6月2日周四 11:14写道： > > >> > > > > >> > >> OK, got it. Thanks for the clarification~ > > >> > >> > > >> > >> Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> 于2022年6月2日周四 11:12写道： > > >> > >> > > >> > >>> I don’t think a flaky test is cause to fail the release. So > these > > >> all > > >> > >>> have a fix version of 2.5.1. I mentioned them so people could be > > >> aware > > >> > of > > >> > >>> these known issue when evaluating their own findings. Hope that > > >> helps. > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>>>> On Jun 1, 2022, at 8:11 PM, 张铎 <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> On flakyness, if it is a big problem on promoting the RC, I > > >> think we > > >> > >>> can > > >> > >>>> ignore the test first(instead of removing it). > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> Can open a follow on issue to make it stable. > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> Thanks. > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> 于2022年6月1日周三 23:25写道： > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>>> Makes sense and if nobody has a concern we can do that. > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> Also you wanted to support the change to the RSGroup API and > put > > >> back > > >> > >>> the > > >> > >>>>> unit test (and fix it to not flake), correct, which seems fine > > to > > >> me > > >> > >>> too. > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>>> On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 10:54 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) < > > >> > [email protected] > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>>>> wrote: > > >> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>> The ReplicationLoadSink change is done in HBASE-26490, this > is > > >> the > > >> > >>> commit > > >> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > > > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/hbase/commit/b5b286d793f00ec8b9ed02f51fd9324e46f29c86 > > >> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>> The constructor is marked as IA.Private so I do not think we > > >> need to > > >> > >>>>>> restore it back. > > >> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>> Thanks. > > >> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>> Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> 于2022年6月1日周三 13:08写道： > > >> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> This is not a VOTE. > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> HBase 2.5.0RC0 is ready for testing, other evaluation, and > > >> > >>>>> consideration > > >> > >>>>>> of > > >> > >>>>>>> compatibility concerns. > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> The release notes need to be rebased on the latest 2.4.x > > >> release, > > >> > >>>>> 2.4.12. > > >> > >>>>>>> Fix > > >> > >>>>>>> versions on relvant JIRAs must be cleaned up first. This is > in > > >> > >>>>> progress. > > >> > >>>>>> I > > >> > >>>>>>> also plan to try our new audit tool for matching git history > > and > > >> > fix > > >> > >>>>>>> versions. > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> There are known flaky unit tests and minor issues. You can > > find > > >> > them > > >> > >>> by > > >> > >>>>>>> searching for the '2.5.1' fix version, or this URL: > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> https://s.apache.org/hbase-v2.5.1 > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> The compatibility report, based on 2.4.12, can be found > here: > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > > > >> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/2.5.0RC0/api_compare_2.4.12_to_2.5.0RC0.html > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> An initial response to some of the findings can be found on > > >> > >>>>> HBASE-27081, > > >> > >>>>>>> along > > >> > >>>>>>> with additional discussion. Further discussion is probably > > >> > necessary. > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> The tag to be evaluated is 2.5.0RC0: > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/tree/2.5.0RC0 > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> This tag currently points to git reference 2da2dd917 . > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> The release files, including signatures, digests, as well as > > >> > >>> CHANGES.md > > >> > >>>>>>> and RELEASENOTES.md included in this RC can be found at: > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/2.5.0RC0/ > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> Maven artifacts are available in a staging repository at: > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1486/ > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> Artifacts were signed with the 0xD5365CCD key which can be > > found > > >> > in: > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> https://downloads.apache.org/hbase/KEYS > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> The second release candidate, 2.5.0RC1, will be made > available > > >> for > > >> > >>>>>>> evaluation > > >> > >>>>>>> after discussion and any necessary changes and fixes have > > >> settled. > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> Best, > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>>> Your 2.5 Release Manager > > >> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> -- > > >> > >>>>> Best regards, > > >> > >>>>> Andrew > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - > > >> > >>>>> It's what we’ve earned > > >> > >>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > > >> > >>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > > >> > >>>>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > > > Andrew > > > > > > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - > > > It's what we’ve earned > > > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > > > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > > > - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Andrew > > > > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - > > It's what we’ve earned > > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > > - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > > >
