Hi folks, I plan to merge https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/495 today.
As we found several issues in the binary distribution: - https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/542 (https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/561) - and generally speaking https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Abug I propose to release *only* the source distribution for 0.9.0 and work on the Polaris binary/standalone distribution for 0.9.1 (bug fix). So my proposal is: - let's do 0.9.0 rc2 today (as soon as #542 is merged) - work on minimum Polaris binary distribution fixed for 0.9.1 (that I can do in January), if possible switch the runtime framework - 1.0.0 should be "standalone" production ready, it would be great to focus on this for Feb I also propose to list the high level releases on the website to give visibility to our users. Thoughts ? Regards JB On Mon, Dec 9, 2024 at 7:24 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > > Hi guys > > I’m now back from travel. I’m resuming work on Polaris especially the rc2 > preparation. > > The goal is to submit rc2 to vote this week. > > Regards > JB > > Le mar. 3 déc. 2024 à 16:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> a écrit > : >> >> Hi Yufei >> >> I have a couple of PRs that have to be merged before cutting the rc2. >> >> Especially this one: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/495 >> >> I already fixed the NOTICE file and the LICENSE for source >> distribution, LICENSE.bin is for binary distribution. >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 5:45 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi JB, >> > >> > Do we have a new RC to vote? >> > >> > Yufei >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 10:21 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Hi Ryan >> > > >> > > 1. For the LICENSE file, I agree with you: the LICENSE should only >> > > contain 3rd party *code* included in the *source* >> > > release (dependencies don't matter here). >> > > 2. For the NOTICE file, I don't think it should be so "simple" for two >> > > reasons: >> > > 2.1 According to the section 4.d of the ALv2, the NOTICE file should >> > > include NOTICE content from ALv2 software used by Polaris. >> > > 2.2.As recommended by the ASF, a copyright re-location should be >> > > mentioned in the NOTICE file (following a SGA) >> > > >> > > Anyway, I will fix all this. >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Regards >> > > JB >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 8:05 PM rdb...@gmail.com <rdb...@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > -1 (binding) >> > > > >> > > > I don't think that the license documentation is sufficient. It looks >> > > like the LICENSE file for the source tarball was auto-generated from >> > > dependencies and doesn't document the difference between dependencies and >> > > sources that are included. There is at least one library, jersey-json, >> > > that >> > > is dual licensed with a category B license (CDDL 1.1) and a category X >> > > license (GPL v2). I don't _think_ that code from that project is >> > > included, >> > > but nothing tells me that and if there were code included in the source >> > > tarball, this would not be releasable under [ASF policy]( >> > > https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html). >> > > > >> > > > The NOTICE file is also incomplete, most likely because the >> > > documentation is auto-generated. There are clear notices in the text of >> > > LICENSE, which is what the NOTICE file is intended for (so downstream >> > > projects have one place to look for legally required notices). That file >> > > must also be minimal, so I think it needs to be researched and curated >> > > rather than generated. >> > > > >> > > > Ryan >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 5:22 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > > > <j...@nanthrax.net> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >> Good call Dmitri. >> > > >> >> > > >> I agree with this plan. >> > > >> >> > > >> Is everyone happy with that ? >> > > >> >> > > >> Regards >> > > >> JB >> > > >> >> > > >> On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 12:46 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov >> > > >> <dmitri.bourlatch...@dremio.com> wrote: >> > > >> > >> > > >> > I believe the 0.9.0 release was meant to be a trial release to test >> > > the process. With that in mind, in-memory polaris still works fine in >> > > 0.9.0. I suppose we can finish the release and fix issues on main for >> > > 0.9.1. This way we get to test how smoothly patch releases work too. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > ... just my 2 cents :) >> > > >> > >> > > >> > Cheers, >> > > >> > Dmitri. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 4:53 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > > >> > <j...@nanthrax.net> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> Just to be clear, my preference would be to revert #438 on 0.9 >> > > branch. >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> Regards >> > > >> >> JB >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 10:51 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >> > > j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > Hi Dmitri >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > Good catch. >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > I think it's severe enough to cancel rc1 and prepare a new one >> > > >> >> > including eclipselink fix. >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > Thoughts ? >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > Regards >> > > >> >> > JB >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 9:21 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov >> > > >> >> > <dmitri.bourlatch...@dremio.com.invalid> wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> > > I've just noticed that RC1 includes >> > > >> >> > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/438, which, I think, >> > > makes >> > > >> >> > > bootstrapping on EclispeLink effectively impossible, because >> > > there's no >> > > >> >> > > user-level way to discover the generated root secret. >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> > > From my personal point of view it is not a release blocker, so >> > > I'm keeping >> > > >> >> > > my previous +1 vote, but I wanted to raise this concern in case >> > > it is >> > > >> >> > > important for other people. >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> > > Cheers, >> > > >> >> > > Dmitri. >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 11:37 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >> > > j...@nanthrax.net> >> > > >> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> > > > Actually, reverting my vote to +1 (binding) >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> > > > NB >> > > >> >> > > > - .keep and .typed are actually empty files (even if flagged >> > > >> >> > > > as >> > > >> >> > > > binary), so not a problem >> > > >> >> > > > - I will fix all gradle related issue during release process >> > > and >> > > >> >> > > > documentation (already working on fix about digest >> > > sourceTarball and >> > > >> >> > > > Maven publication) >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> > > > Regards >> > > >> >> > > > JB >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> > > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 6:04 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >> > > j...@nanthrax.net> >> > > >> >> > > > wrote: >> > > >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > -1 (binding) >> > > >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > I found that the source distribution includes binaries, >> > > especially >> > > >> >> > > > > gradlew, .keep, *.typed, it has to excluded from the source >> > > >> >> > > > > distribution >> > > >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > I will cancel this vote to fix that in rc2. >> > > >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > Regards >> > > >> >> > > > > JB >> > > >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > On Sun, Nov 17, 2024 at 7:00 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >> > > j...@nanthrax.net> >> > > >> >> > > > wrote: >> > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > Hi everyone, >> > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > I propose that we release the following RC as the >> > > >> >> > > > > > official >> > > Apache >> > > >> >> > > > > > Polaris 0.9.0-incubating release. >> > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > * This corresponds to the tag: >> > > apache-polaris-0.9.0-incubating-rc1 >> > > >> >> > > > > > * >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/commits/apache-polaris-0.9.0-incubating-rc1 >> > > >> >> > > > > > * >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/tree/445c42768d1e3148c912ac5c45ee53036b9ef318 >> > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > The release tarball, signature, and checksums are here: >> > > >> >> > > > > > * >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/polaris/0.9.0-incubating/ >> > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > You can find the KEYS file here: >> > > >> >> > > > > > * >> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/polaris/KEYS >> > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > Convenience binary artifacts are staged on Nexus. The >> > > Maven repository >> > > >> >> > > > URL is: >> > > >> >> > > > > > * >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepolaris-1003/ >> > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > Please download, verify, and test. >> > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > Please vote in the next 72 hours. >> > > >> >> > > > > > [ ] +1 Release this as Apache polaris 0.9.0-incubating >> > > >> >> > > > > > [ ] +0 >> > > >> >> > > > > > [ ] -1 Do not release this because... >> > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > Only PPMC members and mentors have binding votes, but >> > > other community >> > > >> >> > > > > > members are >> > > >> >> > > > > > encouraged to cast non-binding votes. This vote will pass >> > > if there are >> > > >> >> > > > > > 3 binding +1 votes and more binding +1 votes than -1 >> > > >> >> > > > > > votes. >> > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > NB: if this vote passes, a new vote will be started on >> > > >> >> > > > > > the >> > > Incubator >> > > >> >> > > > > > general mailing >> > > >> >> > > > > > list. >> > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > Thanks >> > > >> >> > > > > > Regards >> > > >> >> > > > > > JB >> > > >> >> > > > >> > >
