I think we have some open blockers for 2.8. Or at least one that was introduced in a recent commit . https://issues.cloudera.org/browse/IMPALA-4707. Do we plan to include a fix or just exclude the commit that introduced it?
On 5 Jan 2017 9:09 AM, "Jim Apple" <[email protected]> wrote: I have now also tested the docs build: http://jenkins.impala.io:8080/view/Utility/job/docs-build/92/ On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:28 AM, Jim Apple <[email protected]> wrote: > I have now tested this hash (4fa9270e647b9c097295dcc13d97136cca3139ad) > on public Jenkins: > > http://jenkins.impala.io:8080/view/Utility/job/parallel-all-tests/130/ > http://jenkins.impala.io:8080/view/Utility/job/ubuntu-14.04- from-scratch/434/ > http://jenkins.impala.io:8080/view/Utility/job/ubuntu-14.04- from-scratch/435/ > http://jenkins.impala.io:8080/view/Utility/job/ubuntu-14.04- from-scratch/436/ > > That covers RAT (the tool for checking copyright compliance), various > build options (including ninja, release, asan, shared libs), loading > the data from scratch and running all tests in core and in exhaustive, > clang-tidy, and the build we instruct IPMC release testers to run > (bin/bootstrap_build.sh). > > I have also created a git branch: > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-impala. git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/branch-2.8.0 > > I am working on a commit to add a disclaimer to the docs > (https://gerrit.cloudera.org/#/c/5610/) and then I will upload a > release candidate tarball. > > Please prepare yourself to vote. Instructions are here: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IMPALA/ DRAFT%3A+How+to+Release#DRAFT:HowtoRelease-HowtoVoteonaReleaseCandidate > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Jim Apple <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I'd figure out a way to add a big caveat to the docs. Maybe on the landing >>> page? Even better if there's a template we can add a caveat to that appears >>> on every page. >> >> I like this idea. I'll prepare a patch for the landing page. >> >> I don't think there is a simple way to do it on every page. John, >> Laurel, am I wrong abut that?
