+1 - Verified all checksums and signatures. - Checked LICENSE and NOTICE. - Built from source successfully. - Passed all unit tests. (TestRaftReconfigurationWithGrpc#testBootstrapReconfWithSingleNodeAddOne failed initially. It passed after some re-runs.)
Thanks a lot! Tsz-Wo On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 7:53 PM Tsz Wo Sze <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Attila, > > Thanks a lot for the update. Will verify the rc0 artifacts. > > Tsz-Wo > > > On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 4:12 PM Attila Doroszlai <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Thanks Tsz-Wo for checking rc0 and reporting these issues. >> >> > - The link https://github.com/apache/ratis/tree/ratis-2.3.0-rc0 points >> to >> > the commit id a37571aca4ed4bae8f3aebe696c806a2d54511ea but not >> > 87c54d0dbb256434e9829307017e945a28bef887. >> >> You are right. >> >> 87c54d0dbb256434e9829307017e945a28bef887 is the hash of the >> ratis-2.3.0-rc0 tag itself, which points to commit >> a37571aca4ed4bae8f3aebe696c806a2d54511ea. >> >> Sorry about that. >> >> > - There is a warning "This commit does not belong to any branch on this >> > repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository." The >> > commit a37571a seems not yet pushed to Apache. We usually push the rc >> to a >> > branch named with the version, i.e. 2.3.0 in this case. >> >> For the record, the same applies to some previous releases: >> - https://github.com/apache/ratis/tree/ratis-2.2.0 >> - https://github.com/apache/ratis/tree/ratis-2.2.0-rc0 >> - https://github.com/apache/ratis/tree/ratis-2.1.0 >> - https://github.com/apache/ratis/tree/ratis-2.1.0-rc1 >> - https://github.com/apache/ratis/tree/ratis-2.1.0-rc0 >> >> I have pushed the branch release-2.3.0 now. >> >> > I think we need to roll rc1. >> >> IMO neither of these problems require rolling rc1, since the content >> of the release artifacts (tarballs and signatures) are not affected. >> >> -Attila >> >
