+1 I ran tests and passed in first try without issues. Great Jobs! Thanks, Angelo
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Mona Chitnis <[email protected]> wrote: > For me too, org.apache.oozie.service.TestPauseTransitService passed on 1 > retry. > > +1 on the release. Great job! > > Mona > > > > On 2/17/12 2:50 PM, "Harsh J" <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 on rc2 (ccb3e271892d6e69881eb3785ef2bc3c). > > (On OSX) - Downloaded, ran bin/mkdistro.sh and it ended in a success > after one retry. > > (Test org.apache.oozie.service.TestPauseTransitService seems a little > flaky, but may be just me, cause eventual runs of that specific test > all passed - it just failed on my first run). > > On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Virag Kothari <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Downloaded the source, ran the test cases - all works fine! > > +1 > > > > Thanks, > > Virag > > > > On 2/17/12 3:38 AM, "Chris Douglas" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> Hi Chris, > >>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now? > >> > >> Yes > >> > >>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at > this > >>> stage? > >>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there. > >>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user > >> > >> Might as well show support/express reservations on the > >> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@ > >> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C > >> > >>> Regards, > >>> Mohammad > >>> > >>> > >>> ________________________________ > >>> From: Chris Douglas <[email protected]> > >>> To: [email protected] > >>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <[email protected]>; " > [email protected]" > >>> <[email protected]> > >>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM > >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2) > >>> > >>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the > >>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code, > >>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact > >>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some > >>> series, just as a PMC does. > >>> > >>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make > >>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing > >>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to > >>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing > >>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the > >>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought > >>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.). > >>> > >>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear > >>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then > >>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary > >>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The > >>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their > >>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get > >>> the ASF into legal trouble. > >>> > >>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting > >>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second > >>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting > >>> problem. -C > >>> > >>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <[email protected] > > > >>> wrote: > >>>> Chris, > >>>> > >>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes > where from > >>>> the IPMC. > >>>> > >>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same > lines. > >>>> > >>>> Thxs. > >>>> > >>>> Alejandro > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I > know, > >>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie. > >>>>> > >>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing > >>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant > >>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC > >>>>> please weigh in? -C > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <[email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> Hi All, > >>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote. > >>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make > it > >>>>> better. > >>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the > whole > >>>>> process smoother. > >>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>> Moahmmad > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ________________________________ > >>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <[email protected]> > >>>>>> To: [email protected] > >>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <[email protected]> > >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks > good. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> +1 for the release. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating > >>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding). > >>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate > >>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad) > >>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version > >>>>> (tucu) > >>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop > 1.0.0/0.23.1 > >>>>> (tucu) > >>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu) > >>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information. > >>>>> (Mohammad) > >>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all > >>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad) > >>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad) > >>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad) > >>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty > subdirectory > >>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu) > >>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are > >>>>> failing(Mohamed). > >>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into > >>>>> oozie src(Mohammad) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at > >>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/ > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all > can > >>>>> be found at the above link. > >>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was > created > >>>>> could be found at : > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/ > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>> Mohammad > >>>>> > > > > > > -- > *mona > **chitnis > *software developer > > [email protected] > direct 408-336-7908 mobile 864-650-0100 > > 701 first avenue, sunnyvale, ca, 94089-0703, us > phone (408) 349 3300 fax (408) 349 3301 > > >
