Some progress here.
With other developers help(especially Nick, Andrew and Guanghao), I've
successfully made the release scripts able to publish binaries and
maven artifacts for hadoop3, in a dry run mode,

https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/4856

I've put up a discussion thread, for quickly releasing 2.5.2 for the
2.5 release line, with hadoop3 binaries. Please shout if you have any
ideas.

Thanks.

张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月24日周一 12:27写道:
>
> HBASE-27434 has been landed to branch-2.5+. Branch-2.4 does not have a
> flatten plugin so do not apply HBASE-27434 to it.
>
> Filed HBASE-27442 for changing the way of bumping versions in release scripts.
>
> After this change, let's finally go back to HBASE-27359 to make the
> release scripts publish different artifacts for hadoop2 and hadoop3.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> 于2022年10月19日周三 23:36写道:
> >
> > Suggestions:
> >
> > - For HBase 2.x releases, we should continue to publish default builds,
> > those without any -hadoop3- or -widgetfoo- modifiers, against Hadoop 2.
> >
> > - For HBase 3, it makes sense to move the default to Hadoop 3, no other
> > build variants needed there. This is the kind of thing a major version
> > increment allows us to do per our dependency compatibility guidelines.
> >
> > - While eventually it may be necessary to differentiate between minor
> > release lines of Hadoop it would be simpler to pick one Hadoop 3 version,
> > like 3.3.4, and build and publish a -hadoop3- artifact for each current
> > releasing 2.x code line: 2.4.15-hadoop3, 2.5.2-hadoop3, 2.6.0-hadoop3.
> >
> > - The process of building releases is automated by create-release, which
> > all RMs use now. create-release automates the process of building and
> > signing tarballs and publishing to Nexus. There should be no significant
> > new burden on the RM, beyond an increase in time for create-release
> > execution, to parameterize it and iterate over one or more variant builds.
> > That is a long way of suggesting we do publish variant tarballs too, they
> > are almost "for free" if we've gone to the trouble to build for publishing
> > to Nexus.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 12:52 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > After some investigating, I think using the $revision placeholder can
> > > solve the problem here, i.e, using different command line to publish
> > > different artifacts for hadoop2 and hadoop3, with the same souce code.
> > > You can see the comment on HBASE-27359 for more details.
> > >
> > > Next I will open an issue to land the $revision change. And here, I
> > > think first we need to discuss how many new artifacts we want to
> > > publish. For example, for 2.6.0, we only want to publish a
> > > 2.6.0-hadoop3, with the default hadoop3 version? Or we publish
> > > 2.6.0-hadoop3.2, 2.6.0-hadoop3.3 for different hadoop minor release
> > > lines? And do we want to publish different tarballs for hadoop2 and
> > > hadoop3?
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> 于2022年8月31日周三 00:19写道:
> > > >
> > > > I also don't think we should change the defaults in branch-2 until
> > > Hadoop 2
> > > > is EOLed.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 10:22 AM Sean Busbey <bus...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I think changing the default hadoop profile for builds in branch-2
> > > would
> > > > > unnecessarily complicate our compatibility messaging so long as Hadoop
> > > 2
> > > > > hasn't gone EOL.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 5:30 AM Nick Dimiduk <ndimi...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Should we also make hadoop3 the default active profile for branch-2
> > > going
> > > > > > forward?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 5:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > andrew.purt...@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > The security posture of Hadoop 2 in general is a problem, because
> > > > > > > maintenance on that branch is spotty, that is just how it goes. We
> > > had
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > same situation with our now EOL branch-1. I know Hadoop released
> > > 2.10.2
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > address some CVE worthy problems but it is unclear if 2.10.2
> > > addresses
> > > > > > all
> > > > > > > known issues, unlike 3.3.4. Also as you know Hadoop 2 has
> > > unpatchable
> > > > > > > dependencies on org.codehaus versions of Jackson and Jetty, which
> > > > > > > themselves have high scoring CVEs that will never be fixed because
> > > they
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > EOL, and other similar issues. Hadoop 3 doesn’t completely solve
> > > such
> > > > > > > problems but is the only realistic place we can hope they can be
> > > > > > addressed
> > > > > > > as required. For organizations that implement or require a top to
> > > > > bottom
> > > > > > > security audit of their software bill of materials, it seems
> > > possible
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > avoid user pain by providing supported convenience artifacts *and*
> > > > > > > libraries built against Hadoop 3 APIs in the Apache repository
> > > > > > addressable
> > > > > > > with a Maven classifier.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > My employer has some interests in this area that align so I would
> > > like
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > sponsor (implement, review, commit, RM backfill releases, etc.)
> > > this
> > > > > > work.
> > > > > > > Would there be any objections? Read through the thread for some
> > > > > thoughts
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > approach. Summarized:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - Amend create-release to build, stage, and deploy a -hadoop3
> > > variant
> > > > > > > build by activating the Hadoop 3 build profile.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - Amend the Hadoop 3 build profile to flatten POMs before
> > > deployment to
> > > > > > > resolve potential downstream issues due to Hadoop 3 being a
> > > non-default
> > > > > > > build profile. (This could also be applied to all builds.)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - Amend hbase-vote to be aware of and evaluate if present -hadoop3
> > > > > > variant
> > > > > > > artifacts.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Aug 25, 2022, at 10:40 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > andrew.purt...@gmail.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks, that would work.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> On Aug 25, 2022, at 11:35 AM, Sean Busbey <bus...@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> yes, the flatten plugin. We use it in hbase-connectors 
> > > > > > > >> already.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> https://www.mojohaus.org/flatten-maven-plugin/
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> this sounds like it could also be a use case for BOMs, which
> > > would
> > > > > > also
> > > > > > > >> benefit users of our client artifacts that use build tools that
> > > > > don't
> > > > > > > >> respect maven profiles generally, like gradle.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 10:30 AM Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > > > andrew.purt...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Thinking about this a bit more, we will have an issue in that
> > > the
> > > > > > POMs
> > > > > > > >>> published from our -hadoop3 build will not have a default
> > > > > activation
> > > > > > > of our
> > > > > > > >>> Hadoop 3 build profile. The convenience binaries will function
> > > as
> > > > > > > expected
> > > > > > > >>> but Maven will read and process eg Phoenix POMs, then download
> > > and
> > > > > > > perform
> > > > > > > >>> substitutions on HBase POMs, and then etc, so downstreamers
> > > like
> > > > > > > Phoenix
> > > > > > > >>> will have to set up the hadoop.profile variable for us in 
> > > > > > > >>> their
> > > > > > default
> > > > > > > >>> build profile or else the transitive paths through us may be
> > > > > wrong. I
> > > > > > > >>> wonder if there is a Maven plugin available for deploying POMs
> > > with
> > > > > > all
> > > > > > > >>> variable substitutions performed before deployment, that would
> > > > > solve
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > >>> problem and all conceivable related issues.
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>> On Aug 25, 2022, at 11:03 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > > > andrew.purt...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> I think 2.x is going to have a few years of life remaining
> > > so it
> > > > > > > would
> > > > > > > >>> be best, if we are going to address this, to have a 2.x
> > > solution
> > > > > was
> > > > > > > well
> > > > > > > >>> as a 3.x one.
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> In my opinion we can continue to publish 2.4 and 2.5 (and 
> > > > > > > >>>> 2.6)
> > > > > > > unchanged
> > > > > > > >>> and then also introduce a Hadoop 3 release using “hadoop3” or
> > > > > similar
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > >>> Maven classifier. Phoenix could specify this classifier in
> > > their
> > > > > > POMs.
> > > > > > > >>> Everyone should be happy. Users who already are comfortable
> > > with
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > Hadoop
> > > > > > > >>> 2 default don’t have to change anything. A one time POM change
> > > on
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > >>> Phoenix side is required but that’s it.
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> The additional build time complexity for generating two
> > > releases
> > > > > can
> > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > >>> incorporated into create-release. Nobody does manual releases
> > > any
> > > > > > more
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > >>> far as I know. Likewise, download and verification of -hadoop3
> > > > > > > convenience
> > > > > > > >>> binaries can be added to hbase-vote. I believe we are all 
> > > > > > > >>> using
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > tool
> > > > > > > >>> for verification of releases now. After these one time changes
> > > are
> > > > > > > landed
> > > > > > > >>> the cost for RMs and PMC will be only in a roughly doubled
> > > amount
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > time
> > > > > > > >>> needed to build and verify releases.
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> On Aug 17, 2022, at 9:06 AM, Nick Dimiduk <
> > > ndimi...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Hi Geoffrey,
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> I have no complaints with shipping convenience binaries
> > > built
> > > > > > > against
> > > > > > > >>> both
> > > > > > > >>>>> Hadoop2 and Hadoop3. The primary challenge is implementing
> > > the
> > > > > > > >>>>> necessary build changes, the secondary challenge is
> > > > > > > verifying/testing it
> > > > > > > >>>>> works reliably.
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> But for Phoenix, are you asking for convenience binaries, or
> > > are
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > > >>> asking
> > > > > > > >>>>> for artifacts published into maven that have the Hadoop3
> > > profile
> > > > > > > >>> activated
> > > > > > > >>>>> and specify the associated dependencies?
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> I'm afraid that the 2.5.0 release ship has already sailed.
> > > I've
> > > > > > heard
> > > > > > > >>> talk
> > > > > > > >>>>> of a 2.6 "fast-follow", so maybe someone can have the build
> > > > > changes
> > > > > > > >>> ready
> > > > > > > >>>>> for that? Also, isn't this a too little, too late situation?
> > > > > > > Shouldn't
> > > > > > > >>> we
> > > > > > > >>>>> shift our focus to releasing 3.0, which has dropped support
> > > for
> > > > > > > Hadoop2?
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> Thanks,
> > > > > > > >>>>> Nick
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 9:30 PM Geoffrey Jacoby <
> > > > > > > gjac...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> I see that the next HBase 2.5 RC is imminent, and before
> > > that's
> > > > > > set
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > >>>>>> stone, I wanted to bring up the question of whether there
> > > will
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > >>> official
> > > > > > > >>>>>> HBase 2.5 binaries built with the Hadoop 3 profile and
> > > available
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >>>>>> usual Maven repositories. (In addition to the usual Hadoop 
> > > > > > > >>>>>> 2
> > > > > > profile
> > > > > > > >>>>>> binaries)
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> The HBase 2.x line has a commitment to maintain support for
> > > > > Hadoop
> > > > > > > >>> 2.x, but
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Hadoop 3.3 is the current stable Hadoop line and the most
> > > recent
> > > > > > > >>> release
> > > > > > > >>>>>> notes [1] encourage all users of Hadoop  2.x to upgrade to
> > > > > Hadoop
> > > > > > 3.
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Without convenience artifacts built against Hadoop 3, no
> > > > > end-users
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Hadoop 3 clusters will be able to use the 
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Apache-distributed
> > > > > > > binaries
> > > > > > > >>> and
> > > > > > > >>>>>> will instead have to recompile HBase from source
> > > themselves, or
> > > > > > use
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > >>> 3rd
> > > > > > > >>>>>> party distribution that does so for them.
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> This is especially inconvenient for downstream projects
> > > such as
> > > > > > > Apache
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Phoenix, which has never  officially supported the HBase
> > > 2.x /
> > > > > > > Hadoop
> > > > > > > >>> 2.10
> > > > > > > >>>>>> combination. (It currently supports only HBase 2.3 or 2.4
> > > with
> > > > > > > Hadoop
> > > > > > > >>> 3.
> > > > > > > >>>>>> HBase 2.5 support will be added very shortly after its
> > > release
> > > > > as
> > > > > > > part
> > > > > > > >>> of
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Phoenix 5.2.)
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> To even run the Phoenix IT tests locally requires
> > > contributors
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > >>> download
> > > > > > > >>>>>> the HBase source release and manually mvn install to their
> > > local
> > > > > > > maven
> > > > > > > >>> repo
> > > > > > > >>>>>> using the Hadoop 3 profile, to avoid crashes in the HBase
> > > > > > > >>> minicluster.[2]
> > > > > > > >>>>>> This is a barrier to new contributors and confuses even
> > > veteran
> > > > > > > ones,
> > > > > > > >>> and
> > > > > > > >>>>>> has to be done again for every new HBase release.
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> In general, I expect the Hadoop 3 user base to grow and the
> > > > > Hadoop
> > > > > > > 2.10
> > > > > > > >>>>>> user base to shrink with every future HBase 2 release, so I
> > > > > think
> > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > >>> is a
> > > > > > > >>>>>> worthwhile improvement.
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Thanks,
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Geoffrey
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> [1] https://hadoop.apache.org/release/3.3.4.html
> > > > > > > >>>>>> [2]
> > > https://github.com/apache/phoenix/blob/master/BUILDING.md
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 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

Reply via email to