This is my patch. Basically it adds back the fatjar module to the full-build profile this way we have only one profile that actually does the "full build" = all maven modules
I feel this is a very clear way for users, mvn clean package -Pfull-build this builds the whole repository Enrico Il giorno sab 18 apr 2020 alle ore 08:28 Enrico Olivelli < eolive...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > 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 >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > >>>> >>>
