Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

+1 * Verified SVN staging area (dist/dev/accumulo/1.9.0-rc1) tarballs match Nexus staging area (artifacts and GPG sigs) and SHA512s there are correct. * Ran mvn verify -DskipTests with both Hadoop 2 and Hadoop 3 * Ran all ITs successfully with Hadoop 2 * GPG signatures match release tarball

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

+1 Ran randomwalk "All.xml" tests across 7 walkers and 1 leader EC2 cluster for almost 48 hours. No problems seen other than a false positive with the test that is fixed in PR #429 On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Keith Turner

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

+1 * Successfully built Fluo against RC * Ran continuous ingest for 24hrs on 9 node cluster using RC. Verified successfully. Table had 32.3 billion entries after test. On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 6:21 PM, Christopher wrote: > Accumulo Developers, > > Please consider the

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

I started continuous ingest running on a 9 node EC2 cluster this morning. I plan to let ingest run for ~24hrs and then run verify. I will not know the results of this for ~2 days. On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 6:21 PM, Christopher wrote: > Accumulo Developers, > > Please consider

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 9:30 PM Sean Busbey wrote: > > > On 2018/04/16 01:26:54, Sean Busbey wrote: > > > > > > On 2018/04/15 21:39:04, Christopher wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 10:11 AM Sean Busbey > wrote:

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

On 2018/04/16 01:26:54, Sean Busbey wrote: > > > On 2018/04/15 21:39:04, Christopher wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 10:11 AM Sean Busbey wrote: > > > > > > > However, I can't verify that the source artifact or any other

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

Does "strongly against" in this case mean "-1" or still "-0" ? On 2018/04/15 17:24:33, Mike Drob wrote: > I am strongly against generating and publishing checksum information after > a vote because that ostensibly means it hasn't been verified and voted on. > > On Sun, Apr 15,

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

On 2018/04/15 21:39:04, Christopher wrote: > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 10:11 AM Sean Busbey wrote: > > > -1 on the RC vote > > > > I agree that in the staged maven repository we should stick to SHOULD > > guidance until such time that the maven tooling

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

I don't have strong feelings about how we implement hosting the RC, but I do want the RC to contain the actual checksum that we're going to use when we publish on dist.a.o in the release. Otherwise we're not verifying that said checksum is correct for the artifact we're voting on, which is

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 10:11 AM Sean Busbey wrote: > -1 on the RC vote > > I agree that in the staged maven repository we should stick to SHOULD > guidance until such time that the maven tooling has a supported option to > use correct checksums. (Have we verified that the

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

+1 * verified hashes and signature * build passed mvn clean verify -Psunny * build passed all unit testing * ran an accumulo instance using Uno * verified basic functionality via the accumulo shell command On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 1:24 PM, Mike Drob wrote: > I am strongly

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

I am strongly against generating and publishing checksum information after a vote because that ostensibly means it hasn't been verified and voted on. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Christopher wrote: > Mike, > > We use stronger checksums (SHA512) in the SVN[1] area and

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

I am trying to understand what you are looking for with your -1. It sounds like you want following files created in https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/accumulo/1.9.0 for each release candidate: accumulo-1.9.0-bin.tar.gz accumulo-1.9.0-bin.tar.gz.asc accumulo-1.9.0-bin.tar.gz.sha512

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

sorry, that should have been "staged maven repository should stick to MUST guidance" On 2018/04/15 14:11:43, Sean Busbey wrote: > -1 on the RC vote > > I agree that in the staged maven repository we should stick to SHOULD > guidance until such time that the maven tooling

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

-1 on the RC vote I agree that in the staged maven repository we should stick to SHOULD guidance until such time that the maven tooling has a supported option to use correct checksums. (Have we verified that the relevant tooling at a minimum has a request in to add it?) However, I can't

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

Mike, We use stronger checksums (SHA512) in the SVN[1] area and downloads page[2] after a vote passes. In fact, we're one of the only "perfect projects" in regards to compliance with this policy[3]. The Maven staging area doesn't follow all the "SHOULD" statements, but that's only because these

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

-0 please do not publish md5 sums please add missing sha256 sums apache release policy: http://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution#sigs-and-sums On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 11:37 AM, Mike Walch wrote: > +1 > > * Verified sha1 & md5 hashes matched > * Verified signatures > *

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

+1 * Verified sha1 & md5 hashes matched * Verified signatures * Ran binary tarball locally using Uno * Ran 'mvn verify' successfully for wikisearch using RC jars On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 6:21 PM, Christopher wrote: > Accumulo Developers, > > Please consider the following

RE: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

+1 I verified the md5, sha1 and asc signatures of the artifacts and the git commit sha1, the build passed mvn clean verify -Psunny, and I accept this as a release of Accumulo 1.9.0, pending the successful outcome of cluster testing. Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Christopher

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

Verified sha1, md5 and asc signatures for src and binary tars. Successfully built using 'mvn clean verify -Psunny' from the extracted source. I plan on setting up a cluster for randomwalk on Monday. On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 6:21 PM, Christopher wrote: > Accumulo Developers,