Hi, Branch-3.6 is broken due to the fatjat stuff [eolivelli@localhost zookeeper]$ mvn clean -Pfull-build,fatjar [INFO] Scanning for projects... [ERROR] [ERROR] Project 'org.apache.zookeeper:zookeeper-contrib-fatjar:3.6.1-SNAPSHOT' is duplicated in the reactor @ [ERROR] Project 'org.apache.zookeeper:zookeeper-contrib-fatjar:3.6.1-SNAPSHOT' is duplicated in the reactor -> [Help 1] [ERROR]
I am preparing a fix Enrico Il giorno sab 18 apr 2020 alle ore 07:08 Enrico Olivelli < eolive...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > > Il Ven 17 Apr 2020, 08:50 Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> ha > scritto: > >> Thank you Christopher ! >> >> I have manually fixed the pom.xml files in branch-3.6 and release-3.6.1 >> branches. >> >> I would like to port ZOOKEEPER-3791 to branch-3.6 (that is now >> 3.6.2-SNAPSHOT) and to 3.6.1 (that is now 3.6.1-SNAPSHOT) >> > > I will try to perform the release without ZOOKEEPER-3791 > > Enrico > > > >> We need another binding +1 on ZOOKEEPER-3791, Benjamin Reed already >> started a review. >> >> I hope we can fix this stuff soon, this way we can release 3.6.1 to the >> public >> >> Enrico >> >> >> Il giorno gio 16 apr 2020 alle ore 23:08 Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> >> ha scritto: >> >>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 9:52 AM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Christopher, >>> > answers inline. >>> > Thank you for testing ! >>> > >>> > Il giorno gio 16 apr 2020 alle ore 15:12 Christopher < >>> ctubb...@apache.org> >>> > ha scritto: >>> > >>> > > -0 (non-binding), I did find some problems that prevent some maven >>> > > profiles, including fatjar, from being activated, among other minor >>> > > issues; nothing too serious, but the inability to run the fatjar >>> > > profile might be a blocker for some, as might be the missing patch >>> for >>> > > ipv6 comparisons in the C client. >>> > > >>> > > Good >>> > > * I tested the convenience binary with Apache Accumulo 2.0.0 and >>> basic >>> > > functionality is all there >>> > > * I checked the LICENSE.txt/NOTICE.txt files for expected content >>> > > (copyright year was 2020, as expected) >>> > > * Provided SHA512 signatures and GPG signatures match the tarballs >>> > > (though the .sha512 files don't have terminating EOL chars) >>> > > >>> > > >>> 3cc33e7630eb47e5807bc90610ae084c603960645ab36d4d6f775715ea75a7041835507029a2ca815ae16f4b8110bf9001a602ed78f0a7866c11dc15643b747c >>> > > apache-zookeeper-3.6.1-bin.tar.gz >>> > > >>> > > >>> 21741f5ee09a8ad897da965c4e3570e4dd7d3a24bf990a8d77738144f4ca883ae6ccf86eb6f9a248c772ef2a22eaed438f4f3313166f89b8e28448d59a6ea7bd >>> > > apache-zookeeper-3.6.1.tar.gz >>> > > * The contents of the source tarball match the contents of the tag >>> > > (3ed3a9890472b251f9a6241317feef5f02cc0692) >>> > > * Was able to build from source using `mvn clean verify -Pfull-build >>> > > -DskipTests` >>> > > >>> > > Bad >>> > > * The tag (and source tarball) is missing the commit for '754cf015f >>> > > ZOOKEEPER-3726: invalid ipv6 address comparison in C client', which >>> is >>> > > present in the branch-3.6 branch >>> > >>> > ** This might be resolvable by simply updating the JIRA to mark >>> > > 3.6.2 as the fixVersion instead of 3.6.1, unless it's critical to >>> > > include >>> > > >>> > >>> > Done. If ZOOKEEPER-3726 is not a blocker then I feel we can live >>> without it. >>> > We can add it in case of the need of a new iteration. >>> >>> Agreed. Makes sense. >>> >>> > >>> > > * Saw a few unit test failures on Fedora 31 x86_64 with Maven 3.6.3 >>> > > and java-13-openjdk-13.0.2.8-1.rolling.fc31.x86_64 (I ran `mvn clean >>> > > package`) >>> > > ** org.apache.zookeeper.server.util.RequestPathMetricsCollectorTest >>> > > failed with AssertionError >>> > > ** org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.QuorumDigestTest failed with >>> > > AssertionError >>> > > >>> > Does it pass if you rerun it again ? This test is not failing for me >>> (on >>> > Linux + jdk8) >>> >>> They both pass on a second run, when I ran them in isolation. It might >>> just be because surefire forkCount is 8, and my laptop is slow. Not >>> sure. Would need further investigation. I'm not worried about this, >>> though, and wouldn't consider it a blocker... but I might open up a >>> JIRA if I see it again and can capture a stack trace or logs. >>> >>> > >>> > >>> > > * release did not appear to be prepared using the >>> maven-release-plugin >>> > > from the branch-3.6, but from a different (local?) branch; this >>> > > resulted in a few minor issues >>> > > >>> > >>> > yes, the tradition here is to create a work branch release-3.6.1 and >>> then >>> > it up to the Release Manager to handle the status of that branch >>> > it is not strictly the Maven way, but we discussed that approach while >>> > releasing 3.6.0, that was the first release with the >>> maven-release-plugin >>> > >>> > this is our guide >>> > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease+using+maven+release+plugin >>> > >>> >>> I recommend using the <pushChanges>false</pushChanges> and >>> <localCheckout>true</localCheckout> in maven-release-plugin (for >>> release:prepare and release:perform) and using '3.6.1' instead as the >>> release version. Improving the build and release process is something >>> I have a lot of experience with, so I may look into this more later. >>> Much of the details on this page can be replaced with an interactive >>> helper script, as I've done for both Accumulo and Fluo already. >>> >>> > >>> > >>> > > ** git commit hashes don't match up with the branch (commits appear >>> > > cherry-picked and exclude ZOOKEEPER-3726, mentioned above) >>> > > >>> > This is not a big deal, it is important that we have the good tag >>> > (release-3.6.1-0) >>> >>> Agreed. This is minor. It was just confusing. Missing commits in the >>> release can be included in future releases. A bigger problem would be >>> if the commits only existed in the tag and not in the maintenance >>> branch, because that might mean a regression in the next release. The >>> main concern I had here was that the JIRA issue was marked as fixed >>> for this release, but it wasn't included. >>> >>> > >>> > ** the content of the pom.xml's <scm> <tag> includes `-0`, which >>> > > will not be the final tag name if the artifacts are approved for >>> > > release (actual tag should be "release-3.6.1") >>> > > >>> > >>> > I agree, this is not nice. We can improve it. >>> > Not a blocker for this release >>> > >>> > >>> > > * fatjar profile is broken because fatjar module and zookeeper-it >>> > > module specify wrong parent pom version (bad cherry-pick from >>> > > master/3.7.0-SNAPSHOT?) >>> > > >>> > >>> > This may be a problem that leads to the inability of building the >>> source >>> > release. >>> > If you do not have ever built 3.7.0-SNAPSHOT locally you won't be able >>> to >>> > build from the released sources. >>> > The source tarball we release is actually the main (an only) release >>> > artifact and it should be buildable. >>> > >>> > I will double check, but I feel this can be a showstopper for this RC >>> > >>> > Christopher, do you want to send a fix patch for branch-3.6 ? >>> >>> I think the core of the problem is that not all modules are activated >>> during `mvn release:prepare` when the POM versions are updated. >>> However, you can't activate all modules at once because `fatjar` and >>> `full-build` profiles are mutually exclusive. >>> This is something I've already fixed in my PR for ZOOKEEPER-3791. >>> >>> I didn't anticipate backporting my PR for ZOOKEEPER-3791 to 3.6, >>> but... the work was already done, and I'm pretty sure it fixes the >>> issue here. So, I added an additional commit to that PR that updates >>> the `<preparationGoals>` to activate all modules (and to use `verify` >>> instead of `install`, since `install` is generally not advised... and >>> can specifically cause problems with `release:prepare` creating >>> different local artifacts than what are staged in `release:perform`). >>> Backporting my PR to 3.6 should fix the problem, but you should test >>> it. >>> >>> > >>> > Enrico >>> > >>> > >>> > > >>> > > Did not check >>> > > * did not run any unit tests from modules other than >>> zookeeper-server, >>> > > since the two test failures mentioned above terminated the build >>> > > prematurely, and I didn't feel like running it again to skip those. >>> :) >>> > > >>> > >>> > You can re-run the build. Or if you want you can build the full >>> repository >>> > with -DskipTests and then build with the "-rf" option (Resume from) and >>> > start the tests from the module after zookeeper-server. >>> > Actually we still have some flaky tests that should be improved, but >>> this >>> > is not a blocker for a release. >>> > >>> > Enrico >>> > >>> > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 6:34 AM Szalay-Bekő Máté >>> > > <szalay.beko.m...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > +1 (non-binding) >>> > > > >>> > > > - I built the source code on Ubuntu 18.4 using OpenJDK 8u242 and >>> maven >>> > > > 3.6.3. >>> > > > - All the unit tests passed (both Java and C-client). >>> > > > - Checkstyle passed >>> > > > - I executed a rolling-upgrade test from 3.5.7 to 3.6.1. (using >>> > > > https://github.com/symat/zk-rolling-upgrade-test) >>> > > > >>> > > > Kind regards, >>> > > > Mate >>> > > > >>> > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 5:45 AM Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > +1 - xsum/sig validated, rat ran clean, I was able to compile >>> and ran >>> > > some >>> > > > > manual tests on varying cluster sizes. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Patrick >>> > > > > >>> > > > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:44 AM Enrico Olivelli < >>> eolive...@gmail.com> >>> > > > > wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > This is a release candidate for 3.6.1. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > It is a bugfix release and it introduces a few bugfixes and new >>> > > features >>> > > > > in >>> > > > > > these areas: >>> > > > > > - compatibility with applications built against 3.5 client >>> libraries >>> > > > > > (restored a few non public APIs) >>> > > > > > - update Netty to 4.1.48.Final >>> > > > > > - ability to pass configuration as file in zkCli for TLS config >>> > > > > > - Add setKeepAlive support for NIOServerCnxn >>> > > > > > - Fix server side request throttling >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > The full release notes is available at: >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310801&version=12346764 >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > *** Please download, test and vote by April 19th 2020, 23:59 >>> UTC+0. >>> > > *** >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Source files: >>> > > > > > >>> https://people.apache.org/~eolivelli/zookeeper-3.6.1-candidate-0/ >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Maven staging repo: >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachezookeeper-1056 >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > The release candidate tag in git to be voted upon: >>> release-3.6.1-0 >>> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/tree/release-3.6.0-1 >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the >>> release: >>> > > > > > https://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > The staging version of the website is: >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > >>> https://people.apache.org/~eolivelli/zookeeper-3.6.1-candidate-0/website/ >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Should we release this candidate? >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Enrico Olivelli >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > >>> >>
