Stig, ah yes, I didn't mix up but I didn't explain enough. Sorry about
that. You made great efforts to make tests stable and I ported them (not
sure I did everything but maybe most of things) back to only 1.x-branch,
not 1.1.x/1.0.x. I would like to see the possibility about fixed this
earlier. If not, looks like someone including me need to investigate the
issue. Switching JDK helps so really odd though.

2018년 2월 1일 (목) 오전 3:47, Stig Rohde Døssing <stigdoess...@gmail.com>님이 작성:

> I meant 1.1.2 RC.
>
> 2018-01-31 9:44 GMT+01:00 Jungtaek Lim <kabh...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Build with JDK 7 fails 3 times in same test: "metrics-test" in a row.
> Looks
> > like building with JDK 8 helps build to pass, but since we support JDK 7
> in
> > 1.x version line, I would like to see build pass with JDK 7. It is hard
> to
> > say intermittent failure, yes it may be intermittent, but really high
> > change.
> >
> > I'll try to build Storm 1.2.0 RC2 as well as Storm 1.0.6 RC2, and see the
> > difference. I'll also try to build with Travis CI to double-check my
> local
> > dev. for JDK 7 is messed or not. If there's difference in result, I'll
> > track down why the difference happens. Any help is much appreciated.
> >
> > Stig, did you encounter this? And if you encountered, did you submit a
> > patch for this?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)
> >
> > 2018년 1월 30일 (화) 오전 4:45, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com>님이 작성:
> >
> > > I’m open to synching storm-kafka-client across those releases if that’s
> > > the direction we want to go, but I’d like to hear from others to make
> > sure
> > > there’s consensus.
> > >
> > > -Taylor
> > >
> > > > On Jan 29, 2018, at 4:04 AM, Jungtaek Lim <kabh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm waiting for hearing Taylor's opinion regarding replacing
> > > > storm-kafka-client in 1.1.x-branch/1.0.x-branch with 1.x-branch,
> since
> > > he's
> > > > release manager on 1.1.2/1.0.6, and IMHO it's ideal to apply the
> change
> > > > sooner if we agree on this rather than postponing to next release.
> > > >
> > > > I'll continue verifying 1.1.2 RC2 and 1.0.6 RC2 if he would want to
> > take
> > > > only blocker issue for current RCs.
> > > >
> > > > -Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)
> > > >
> > > > 2018년 1월 27일 (토) 오전 6:11, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com>님이 작성:
> > > >
> > > >> This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 1.1.2 (rc2)
> > > >>
> > > >> Full list of changes in this release:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-1.
> > 1.2-rc2/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> > > >>
> > > >> The tag/commit to be voted upon is v1.1.2:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=tree;h=
> >
> 55ab8e9c072b09e634a9eddfc7b1e1e0d5d7c27b;hb=5d2eecf3d282a535541ac7520a88b4
> > 7f01153da1
> > > >>
> > > >> The source archive being voted upon can be found here:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-1.
> > 1.2-rc2/apache-storm-1.1.2-src.tar.gz
> > > >>
> > > >> Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-1.1.2-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-1056
> > > >>
> > > >> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 1.1.2.
> > > >>
> > > >> 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 1.1.2
> > > >> [ ]  0 No opinion
> > > >> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release.
> > > >>
> > > >> -Taylor
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to