PR is finally ready https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/1323
Looking for some committer to help me merge that patch Enrico Il giorno sab 18 apr 2020 alle ore 12:42 Enrico Olivelli < eolive...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > Thank you Christopher > > We are iterating over #1323. > I think we can finish the work today > > Enrico > > Il giorno sab 18 apr 2020 alle ore 09:39 Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> > ha scritto: > >> +1 to that approach. I reviewed and made a suggestion on the PR at >> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/1323 >> >> On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 3:16 AM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > 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 >> > >>>> > > > > > >> > >>>> > > > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> >> > >>> >> >
