I am +1 on releasing BETA. Thanks, Harsha
On June 9, 2015 at 10:59:59 AM, Kyle Nusbaum (knusb...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid) wrote: Thanks for the description, Taylor. I'm happy with the release process including 'BETA' as you described. We should document the process, though, so it's concrete. Maybe a few weeks as beta before we either decide we need to release another beta, or decide it's stable enough to call an actual release. -- Kyle On Tuesday, June 9, 2015 12:37 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: Given the severity of STORM-856 and the discussion around whether we want to label this release a “beta” or not, I’m now inclined to cancel the vote and prepare a new release with the following fixes: * STORM-856 * STORM-853 * STORM-813 My question is do we want this release to be a “beta” release or not? -Taylor On Jun 9, 2015, at 11:49 AM, Kyle Nusbaum <knusb...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID> wrote: > Rather than a 'beta' release, can we just start publishing the RC's? > That seems to me like it might be better for the community, as it more > closely reflects our development model. > For the future, I don't see a reason to not package the RC's and then at some > point (when?) publish a beta. The beta kind of makes sense in this context, > due to the finding of a few relatively major bugs right before the release, > but in general I think we'd have to pick a sort of arbitrary point to publish > the 'beta'. Then when we fix bugs, do we release another beta? Do we end up > with RC1, RC2, RC3, Beta1, Beta2, etc? I'd rather keep it simpler than that > by just publishing the RCs. > -- Kyle > > > > On Monday, June 8, 2015 9:18 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> >wrote: > > > Okay. Let's proceed with the release, and label it as a beta. > > We should consider setting a deadline for the next release, and give it > enough time for feedback on the current beta. > > Any thoughts on a timeline? > > -Taylor > > > > >> On Jun 8, 2015, at 9:38 PM, 임정택 <kabh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Either beta or RC is great for me. >> 0.10.0 include many features but it seems not have time to be evaluated by >> users or dog fooding. >> I wanna get official version ASAP which is better for me to persuade my >> team, but getting stable version is most important point, so I'd like to >> test before releasing. >> >> Thanks! >> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >> >> 2015년 6월 9일 화요일, Bobby Evans<ev...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid>님이 작성한 메시지: >> >>> I think that would be great. We expect there to be bug fixes in many >>> different areas. https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/568 is an example. >>> Labeling 0.10.0 as beta seems fine, so long as we have a plan in the >>> relatively near term to move from beta to stable. >>> >>> - Bobby >>> >>> >>> >>> On Monday, June 8, 2015 7:54 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Looks like it's 0.10.x-specific. >>> >>> Perhaps we should label 0.10.0 as a beta? >>> >>> At least that way the user community could at least kick the tires on the >>> new features, and know that known bugs are being addressed. And honestly, >>> we probably should have switched to that model earlier. >>> >>> I think it would be good to get this version in the hands of users, even >>> if it is only early adopters and beta testers (an important part of the >>> community that should always be considered for committer/PMC membership, >>> even if they don't make changes to the core code). >>> >>> -Taylor >>> >>>>> On Jun 8, 2015, at 5:32 PM, Derek Dagit <der...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Found STORM-856: If nimbus goes down with a delayed kill topo cmd, it >>> never comes up >>>> >>>> >>>> Not sure if this is particular to the 0.10.0 line, but it seems bad. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Derek >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> From: P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> >>>> To: dev@storm.apache.org >>>> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2015 3:49 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.10.0 (rc2) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I agree. I’m starting to prepare the announcement blog post (you will >>> see a separate thread shortly). My plan was to not highlight the REST >>> upload API because it has a known issue, and also list it as a known issue >>> in the announcement. >>>> >>>> From there we should put STORM-813 in the 0.10.1 queue and start >>> planning for a 0.10.1 release soon. >>>> >>>> -Taylor >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jun 8, 2015, at 4:32 PM, 임정택 <kabh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> OK, I see your point. >>>>> >>>>> I know Storm 0.10.0 is postponed several times, and it already has very >>>>> huge changeset. >>>>> I don't mean to say we have to postpone again, just want to hear >>>>> opinion that we're OK to release with know issue, or fix it ASAP and >>> reopen >>>>> vote. >>>>> >>>>> I'm +1 (non-binding) with describing known issue to release note so that >>>>> users don't meet strange behavior without information. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2015년 6월 9일 화요일, P. Taylor Goetz<ptgo...@gmail.com>님이 작성한 메시지: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I’m +1 for moving forward with the current release candidate. I think we >>>>>> can address STORM-813 in a follow-up bug fix/maintenance release >>> (soon). >>>>>> >>>>>> In the big picture, the REST upload API is just one of many, many >>>>>> features/improvements added in 0.10.0, and we’ve not leveraged it in >>> any >>>>>> way yet (i.e. in Storm UI). I don’t think it should block the release. >>>>>> >>>>>> -Taylor >>>>>> >>>>>> On Jun 6, 2015, at 2:16 AM, 임정택 <kabh...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> >>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Unfortunately I found a bug from uploadTopology REST API. >>>>>>> (Sorry I participated to review that feature but I didn't think about >>>>>>> multiple arguments.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Here's my checklist. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - test passed : OK >>>>>>> -- extract source tar >>>>>>> -- build via "mvn clean install” >>>>>>> - topology tests via storm-starter : OK >>>>>>> -- run WordCounts and RollingTopWords, local mode and remote mode >>>>>>> - test REST APIs (upload / activate / deactivate / kill) : FAIL >>>>>>> -- activate / deactivate / kill works fine >>>>>>> -- upload topology fails with multiple arguments >>>>>>> -- filed issue to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-853 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Uploading topology is a new feature, so I'd like to include fixed >>> version >>>>>>> of feature to 0.10.0. >>>>>>> (https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/581 is ready for the fix.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Btw, STORM-813 (correcting storm-starter's README) is related to >>> 0.10.0 >>>>>>> so >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd like to include it, but just applying it to Github repo could be >>>>>>> acceptable. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2015-06-06 7:59 GMT+09:00 Kishorkumar Patil >>> <kpa...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid >>>>>>> : >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +1. LGTM. I built and ran some tests. >>>>>>>> -Kishor >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Friday, June 5, 2015 4:38 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com >>>>>>>> <javascript:;>> >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The v0.10.0 tag was already updates as part of the release process. >>> The >>>>>>>> release candidate was built from that tag. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -Taylor >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jun 5, 2015, at 5:16 PM, Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID >>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>>> I checked out the code, built it and ran the tests. Once the vote >>>>>>>>> passes we need to be sure to update the v0.10.0 tag to point to the >>>>>>>> correct >>>>>> >>>>>> release version in git. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Bobby >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Friday, June 5, 2015 2:54 PM, P. Taylor Goetz < >>> ptgo...@apache.org >>>>>>>>> <javascript:;>> >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 0.10.0 (rc2). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Full list of changes in this release: >>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGELOG.md;hb=33d6c74041c286eb8b30b26bd0d6a76aa81a667f >>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The tag/commit to be voted upon is v0.10.0: >>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=tree;h=b8aba80e2259f3e12493a871b1af4f69864d40c2;hb=33d6c74041c286eb8b30b26bd0d6a76aa81a667f >>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The source archive being voted upon can be found here: >>> http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/apache-storm-0.10.0-rc2/apache-storm-0.10.0-src.tar.gz >>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/apache-storm-0.10.0-rc2/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The release artifacts are signed with the following key: >>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=22b832708295fa2c15c4f3c70ac0d2bc6fded4bd >>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The Nexus staging repository for this release is: >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1016 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 0.10.0. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 0.10.0 >>>>>>>>> [ ] 0 No opinion >>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> Taylor >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Name : 임 정택 >>>>>>> Blog : http://www.heartsavior.net / http://dev.heartsavior.net >>>>>>> Twitter : http://twitter.com/heartsavior >>>>>>> LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/heartsavior >>>>> -- >>>>> Name : 임 정택 >>>>> Blog : http://www.heartsavior.net / http://dev.heartsavior.net >>>>> Twitter : http://twitter.com/heartsavior >>>>> LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/heartsavior >>> >>> >
