[Result] This vote close with one +1(binding), and three +1(non-binding).
Even though we agree to cast RC4 on general mailing list, there were few issues we would better resolve. (mainly about custom repository as dependency for asynchbase). I am to resolve above issues then create RC5 soon. Thanks for everyone taking time to check RC4. On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 3:55 PM Sergio Fernández <wik...@apache.org> wrote: > If with that we could get 0.1.0-incubating published to Maven central, then > it'd be worth. > > If so, please Do Yung, cancel this vote. > > On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 4:55 PM, DO YUNG YOON <sho...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi folks. > > > > As we have discussed on this vote thread, and here > > <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/221df53842697da30c2def01221023 > > 3a1b89cc4c0a3d267454713d4b@%3Cdev.s2graph.apache.org%3E>, > > I thought it would be better to resolve custom asynchbase dependency > > issue(S2GRAPH-115, S2GRAPH-116) before posting our RC4 on general mailing > > list. > > > > Thanks to JongWook's contribution, we have finally removed custom > > asynchbase dependency and now s2graph use only dependencies from maven > > central. > > I applied these changes and created RC5 at > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/s2graph/0. > > 1.0-incubating-RC5/ > > > > > > Unless objection, I will close this vote for RC4 and create new RC5 vote > > thread. > > > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 2:59 PM Sergio Fernández <wik...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 5:48 AM, DO YUNG YOON <sho...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > 2. asynchbase dependency in the POM > > > > > > > > Like you point out, users who want to download S2Graph as dependency > > from > > > > Maven central will fail. > > > > > > > > During incubating process, we only release our source code, not > binary, > > > so > > > > I don't think it is a blocker(Please correct me if I am wrong). > > > > > > > > > > Well, that's not completely right, because: Although it is true the > > source > > > is the single binding release, normally projects also publish binary > > > artifacts to help on its usage/adoption. That's valid for top-level > > > projects as well as for incubating podlings: incubating releases should > > be > > > 100% what you'll do after graduation, just its voting process requires > > some > > > more intervention by IPMC. > > > > > > Therefore that's a non-blocking for releasing 0.1.0 RC4, because source > > > release can be build without using such custom dependency. > > > > > > BTW, what is org.hbase:asynchbase:1.7.2-S2GRAPH? Where does it come > > from? > > > Why is not on Maven Central? If it's a fork from AL2 code that it's > only > > > relevent for S2Graph, you could donate it to the S2Graph podling to > have > > an > > > easier way to deal with that dependency. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course It would be great to find out work around for this issue, > but > > > > since my lack of knowledge and experience, I have no idea how to > > resolve > > > > this except sending PR to asynchbase upstream and hope PR get merged > > and > > > > next release of asynchbase contains it. > > > > > > > > > Yes, it would be nice that upcoming releases would provide Maven > > artifacts > > > too. I've registered S2GRAPH-115 for tracking that. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sergio Fernández > > > Partner Technology Manager > > > Redlink GmbH > > > m: +43 6602747925 > > > e: sergio.fernan...@redlink.co > > > w: http://redlink.co > > > > > > > > > -- > Sergio Fernández > Partner Technology Manager > Redlink GmbH > m: +43 6602747925 > e: sergio.fernan...@redlink.co > w: http://redlink.co >
