+1 for merge. thanks for the work. - Verified all checksums and signatures. - Checked LICENSE and NOTICE. - Built from source successfully.
Tsz Wo Sze <[email protected]> 于2022年5月16日周一 17:54写道： > +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 > >> > > >
