Re: [VOTE] Move Aurora to Apache Attic

[Stephan Erb]

With a heavy heart:
+1 (binding)
On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 08:15 +0900, thinker0 wrote:
> +2
> 2020년 2월 5일 (수) 오전 2:22, Mauricio Garavaglia 
> 님이작성:
> > +1
> > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 8:27 PM Dave Lester  wrote:
> > > +1 (binding)
> > > On 2020/02/03 22:59:56, Rick Mangi  wrote:
> > > > +1
> > > > We love Aurora :-)
> > > > 
> > > > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 3:54 PM Bill Farner  wrote:
> > > > > +1
> > > > > Aurora has always been about pragmatism, and right now, this is the
> > > best
> > > > > route for new and existing users.
> > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 5:13 PM Renan DelValle 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > +1 (with a fair bit of sadness but hope for the future of the
> > > project)
> > > > > > 2020-01-31 17:11 GMT-08:00 Renan DelValle:
> > > > > > > Folks,
> > > > > > > As discussed previously, the project activity has diminished to
> > the
> > > > > > point that the overhead of being an Apache project outweighs the
> > > benefits
> > > > > > of being under the Apache umbrella.
> > > > > > > If this vote passes, the PMC will be dissolved, our current
> > project
> > > > > > resources will be moved into the Attic, and the project will reboot
> > > in
> > > > > > Github under https://github.com/aurora-scheduler
> > > > > > > The vote will close on Fri Feb 7 12:00:00 2020 San Francisco Time
> > > > > > > [ ] +1 Move Aurora into the Apache Attic and dissolve the PMC[ ] 
> > > > > > > +0[ ] -1 Move Aurora into the Apache Attic and dissolve the PMC
> > > > > because...

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.22.0 RC1

[Stephan Erb]

+1
Thanks for driving this!

On Wed, 2019-12-04 at 19:45 -0300, Mauricio Garavaglia wrote:
> +1 All tests passed
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 6:37 PM Renan DelValle  wrote:
> > Kicking the voting off with a +1 from me.
> > Ran the end to end tests successfully.
> > On Tue, 03 Dec 2019 13:36:31 -0800 (PST), "Renan DelValle" 
> >  wrote:
> > > All,
> > > I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the 
> > > officialApache Aurora 0.22.0 release.
> > > Aurora 0.22.0-rc1 includes the following:---The RELEASE NOTES for the 
> > > release are available at:
> > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEASE-NOTES.md=rel/0.22.0-rc1
> > > The CHANGELOG for the release is available 
> > > at:https://github.com/apache/aurora/milestone/2?closed=1
> > > 
> > > The tag used to create the release candidate is:
> > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/rel/0.22.0-rc1
> > > The release candidate is available at:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.22.0-rc1/apache-aurora-0.22.0-rc1.tar.gz
> > > The SHA-512 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.22.0-rc1/apache-aurora-0.22.0-rc1.tar.gz.sha512
> > > The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.22.0-rc1/apache-aurora-0.22.0-rc1.tar.gz.asc
> > > The GPG key used to sign the release are available 
> > > at:https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS
> > > 
> > > Please download, verify, and test.
> > > The vote will close on Fri Dec  6 13:30:12 PST 2019
> > > [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.22.0[ ] +0[ ] -1 Do not release 
> > > this as Apache Aurora 0.22.0 because...
> > 
> > 

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.22.0 RC0

[Stephan Erb]

Thanks!

On 04.11.19, 21:14, "Renan DelValle"  wrote:

Voting -1, marking this release as failed, and closing the vote on this 
release candidate.
    
As Stephan Erb pointed out, we are currently failing our end to end tests.

Will investigate a solution and call for a new release candidate.

-Renan

On Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:05:56 -0700 (PDT), "Renan DelValle" 
 wrote:

> All,
> 
> I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the official
> Apache Aurora 0.22.0 release.
> 
> Aurora 0.22.0-rc0 includes the following:
> ---
> The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
> 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gitbox.apache.org_repos_asf-3Fp-3Daurora.git-26f-3DRELEASE-2DNOTES.md-26hb-3Drel_0.22.0-2Drc0=DwIFaQ=ToVbMNJY2W2sI6cHZmZYL1a1DSDW03K-K6TT0TaILp0=ISDnmUOT-10RGgWgc53kGTv-gF4dxvsfeZWzkvP3GNw=yy87aZd8sWwd_JoenCsQdG_vc4Q-wVWi1BhJPaYYfYE=UsuRd4aPp3gPh99omk4l7CS1Yva96hwlkp1E16UrpHU=
 
> 
> The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
> 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gitbox.apache.org_repos_asf-3Fp-3Daurora.git-26f-3DCHANGELOG-26hb-3Drel_0.22.0-2Drc0=DwIFaQ=ToVbMNJY2W2sI6cHZmZYL1a1DSDW03K-K6TT0TaILp0=ISDnmUOT-10RGgWgc53kGTv-gF4dxvsfeZWzkvP3GNw=yy87aZd8sWwd_JoenCsQdG_vc4Q-wVWi1BhJPaYYfYE=v-KVW1MT3vA6Rfbfng07TjWxq9vVgY0DEt40zkllQPc=
 
> 
> The tag used to create the release candidate is:
> 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gitbox.apache.org_repos_asf-3Fp-3Daurora.git-3Ba-3Dshortlog-3Bh-3Drefs_tags_rel_0.22.0-2Drc0=DwIFaQ=ToVbMNJY2W2sI6cHZmZYL1a1DSDW03K-K6TT0TaILp0=ISDnmUOT-10RGgWgc53kGTv-gF4dxvsfeZWzkvP3GNw=yy87aZd8sWwd_JoenCsQdG_vc4Q-wVWi1BhJPaYYfYE=zDzeqlYPrIDQtsu_WIPh_FmRj14HIfj-Hs_DXuT_eMQ=
 
> 
> The release candidate is available at:
> 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__dist.apache.org_repos_dist_dev_aurora_0.22.0-2Drc0_apache-2Daurora-2D0.22.0-2Drc0.tar.gz=DwIFaQ=ToVbMNJY2W2sI6cHZmZYL1a1DSDW03K-K6TT0TaILp0=ISDnmUOT-10RGgWgc53kGTv-gF4dxvsfeZWzkvP3GNw=yy87aZd8sWwd_JoenCsQdG_vc4Q-wVWi1BhJPaYYfYE=Rpc_2JJmMpn5ZuuLuKgKKxR5_ZjOV3TJwAnPVIV_H_w=
 
> 
> The SHA-512 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
> 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__dist.apache.org_repos_dist_dev_aurora_0.22.0-2Drc0_apache-2Daurora-2D0.22.0-2Drc0.tar.gz.sha512=DwIFaQ=ToVbMNJY2W2sI6cHZmZYL1a1DSDW03K-K6TT0TaILp0=ISDnmUOT-10RGgWgc53kGTv-gF4dxvsfeZWzkvP3GNw=yy87aZd8sWwd_JoenCsQdG_vc4Q-wVWi1BhJPaYYfYE=EFgkQNFZWKgAFnWQFYeEPfMHIBK_bGAhxlfIlGGcgv8=
 
> 
> The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
> 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__dist.apache.org_repos_dist_dev_aurora_0.22.0-2Drc0_apache-2Daurora-2D0.22.0-2Drc0.tar.gz.asc=DwIFaQ=ToVbMNJY2W2sI6cHZmZYL1a1DSDW03K-K6TT0TaILp0=ISDnmUOT-10RGgWgc53kGTv-gF4dxvsfeZWzkvP3GNw=yy87aZd8sWwd_JoenCsQdG_vc4Q-wVWi1BhJPaYYfYE=vp2q6b9VqdbbCVi9asq10pogRuftRm-QKSxiFZH4LqA=
 
> 
> The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
> 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__dist.apache.org_repos_dist_dev_aurora_KEYS=DwIFaQ=ToVbMNJY2W2sI6cHZmZYL1a1DSDW03K-K6TT0TaILp0=ISDnmUOT-10RGgWgc53kGTv-gF4dxvsfeZWzkvP3GNw=yy87aZd8sWwd_JoenCsQdG_vc4Q-wVWi1BhJPaYYfYE=3Wy1B0ZPQevSu0AkK-I3zLfM2PBaQsJIbkwWvHbLFRY=
 
> 
> Please download, verify, and test.
> 
> The vote will close on Fri Oct 25 13:04:04 PDT 2019
> 
> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.22.0
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.22.0 because...





To the extent permitted by law, we may monitor electronic communications for 
the purposes of ensuring compliance with our legal and regulatory obligations 
and internal policies. We may also collect email traffic headers for analyzing 
patterns of network traffic and managing client relationships. For additional 
information see https://jda.com/privacy-policy.

Re: Re: Planning for 0.22.0 release

[Stephan Erb]

Sounds good from my side as well.

+1

On 15.10.19, 19:20, "Mauricio Garavaglia"  wrote:

+1

On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 7:03 PM Renan DelValle  wrote:

> Folks,
>
> We've accumulated enough changes where I feel comfortable beginning the
> voting process for a release candidate for Aurora 0.22.0
>
> Aurora 0.22.0 would be compatible all the way up to Mesos 1.6.x.
>
> Releasing 0.22.0 would allow us to have a saner path for operators to
> upgrade their Mesos version as we want to also not fall too far behind
> Mesos' latest version.
>
> If enough in the community thinks it would be a good idea to create a
> release candidate and call for a vote, I will start create an RC and call
> for a vote in the coming days.
>
> -Renan
>



To the extent permitted by law, we may monitor electronic communications for 
the purposes of ensuring compliance with our legal and regulatory obligations 
and internal policies. We may also collect email traffic headers for analyzing 
patterns of network traffic and managing client relationships. For additional 
information see https://jda.com/privacy-policy.

Re: Python 2 is being sunset on January, 2020

[Stephan Erb]

Supporting both versions temporarily for one release might be helpful for a 
seamless upgrade path.However, of that is too much effort going directly to 
Python 3 sounds okay to me as well.
There are a few complications with Thrift though. I have left some details on 
the github issue.
Thanks for bringing this up!

On Sat, 2019-09-14 at 08:41 -0400, r...@chartbeat.com wrote:
> We at Chartbeat are fine with the move to python 3.
> > On Sep 13, 2019, at 9:40 PM, Renan DelValle  wrote:
> > Folks,
> > Please chime in as we need feedback from the community to figure out a 
> > pathforward.
> > If there is no feedback received by the end of next week the plan will beto 
> > make 0.22.X the last version of Aurora with guaranteed support forPython2. 
> > Any versions released after 0.22.X will only be guaranteed to workwith 
> > Python3.
> > -Renan
> > > On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 2:34 PM Renan DelValle  wrote:
> > > All,
> > > Python 2 is on it's way out and will no longer be receiving 
> > > securityupdates after Jan 1st, 2020. [1] Aurora currently has a few 
> > > componentswhich are currently only compatible with Python 2 including 
> > > thermos.Running Aurora components that are only compatible with Python 2 
> > > may becomean increasing security liability from the set sunsetting date.
> > > I've opened up an issue on our Github to track/discuss this 
> > > issue:https://github.com/apache/aurora/issues/68
> > > 
> > > Justin Venus has been kind enough to offer his support and expertise 
> > > inthis field to help shepherd this really important task.
> > > Right now we're looking for guidance from the community as to 
> > > thedirection we want to go in:
> > > Do we want to drop support for Python 2 and asks users to migrate 
> > > toPython 3 ASAP?
> > > or
> > > Do we want to move towards deprecating support for Python 2 slowly 
> > > overthe next year with an EOL support of (around) the end of 2020 
> > > whilemaintaining both Python2 and Python3 support until then?
> > > Ideally, we'd go for the second approach but the truth is we're lacking 
> > > indevpower. If we go the second route there is no guarantee that we would 
> > > getthere in time to avoid putting systems at risk.
> > > I'd love to hear everyone's take on this.
> > > -Renan
> > > [1] https://www.python.org/doc/sunset-python-2/
> > > 

Re: Moving website from svnpubsub to gitpubsub

[Stephan Erb]

Sounds good to me. Thanks for driving this!

Updating the documentation is a bit painful though. We would need to invest 
into the tooling to get that fully automated.

Best regards,
Stephan

On 28.08.19, 19:51, "Renan DelValle"  wrote:

CAUTION: External email. Please validate the sender before using the 
content. Do not select “reply all” unless everyone on the list is a valid 
recipient.




All,

I plan on filing a request to move our website from svnpubsub[1] to
gitpubsub[1] as this will make it easier to keep the latest documentation
up to date using a CI.

It looks like this was attempted a while ago (

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_aurora-2Dwebsite=DwIBaQ=ToVbMNJY2W2sI6cHZmZYL1a1DSDW03K-K6TT0TaILp0=ISDnmUOT-10RGgWgc53kGTv-gF4dxvsfeZWzkvP3GNw=EHWGNygn0TA6LjOxuTSJ9gF3yEJbmLPQHLN1v18veqw=XaGX_S3EXzDAx91KlflnGzfSUZ1c38BiK7gJ_OI2Gtw=
 ) but it was never finished.

Unless anyone feels we should stick with svnpubsub, I'll be filing a
request with Apache Infra next week.


-Renan

[1] 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.apache.org_dev_project-2Dsite.html-23intro=DwIBaQ=ToVbMNJY2W2sI6cHZmZYL1a1DSDW03K-K6TT0TaILp0=ISDnmUOT-10RGgWgc53kGTv-gF4dxvsfeZWzkvP3GNw=EHWGNygn0TA6LjOxuTSJ9gF3yEJbmLPQHLN1v18veqw=SIOokRkHpy_5Uh7bLvdqvVQ5nOmpFuPWHrN2C8mK9eI=



To the extent permitted by law, we may monitor electronic communications for 
the purposes of ensuring compliance with our legal and regulatory obligations 
and internal policies. We may also collect email traffic headers for analyzing 
patterns of network traffic and managing client relationships. For additional 
information see https://jda.com/privacy-policy.

Re: Moving website from svnpubsub to gitpubsub

[Stephan Erb]

Sounds good to me. I have no objections moving to git.

Updating the documentation is a bit painful though. We would need to invest 
into the tooling before we get that fully automated, even once we are on git.


On Wed, 2019-08-28 at 10:50 -0700, Renan DelValle wrote:
> All,
> I plan on filing a request to move our website from svnpubsub[1] 
> togitpubsub[1] as this will make it easier to keep the latest documentationup 
> to date using a CI.
> It looks like this was attempted a while ago 
> (https://github.com/apache/aurora-website) but it was never finished.
> Unless anyone feels we should stick with svnpubsub, I'll be filing arequest 
> with Apache Infra next week.
> 
> -Renan
> [1] https://www.apache.org/dev/project-site.html#intro

Re: Merging Batch Aware Auto Pause and preparing 0.22.0 for release

[Stephan Erb]

Sounds good to me. Thanks for driving this!
I have another small patch lying around that I would like to get upstreamed.  I 
hope to have it ready for review in a few days.
Best regards,Stephan
On Tue, 2019-08-27 at 15:07 -0700, Renan DelValle wrote:
> Folks,
> Pending a sanity check from Mauricio for the changes he requested, I'mlooking 
> to merge PR #54 (https://github.com/apache/aurora/pull/54) whichwill add 
> Batch Aware Auto Pausing within the next two weeks.
> This feature will come in pretty well tested but I want to label it as abeta 
> feature for the time being.
> Following the merging of this feature, I'm going to be looking to shepherdPR 
> #59 (https://github.com/apache/aurora/pull/59) to get it to a pointwhere it's 
> ready to be merged. (Whether this makes it into 0.22.0 will be amatter of how 
> long it takes to get into better shape.)
> I will also be looking at an approximate time to cut 0.22.0 since I 
> thinkwe've accumulated enough changes to warrant a release.
> If anyone has any opinions on the above, please speak up, otherwise I'll 
> goahead with the plan as outlined above.
> -Renan

Re: New PMC member: Mauricio Garavaglia

[Stephan Erb]

Welcome :) We are glad to have you on board!

On 24.07.19, 21:17, "Renan DelValle"  wrote:

All,

It is my pleasure to announce that Mauricio Garavaglia has agreed to join
the Aurora PMC. His membership acceptance comes at a crucial time for the
project to continue to exist as an Apache project.

Finally, just a friendly reminder that we're still looking for folks to
help maintain the project.

-Renan

Status and Health of the Aurora Project

[Stephan Erb]

Dear Aurora community,

the Apache Aurora project has seen a significant slowdown of user and 
contributor activity over the most recent months. This can partially be 
attributed to the overall stability and maturity of the project, but more 
importantly this is due to other external projects that managed to win the 
developer mindshare within the container orchestration field (e.g., general 
purpose cloud providers, Kubernetes, ...).

An Apache project requires at least three active PMC members and an active 
Chair. We are currently not meeting these requirements. 

I am are hereby asking the community to step up if you would like the project 
to remain active. If there is sufficient interest and volunteers, we can reboot 
the PMC with new members. If there is not, then the Aurora project will need to 
be moved to the Apache attic. 

Greetings and thanks to all current and former Aurora users, contributors, and 
PMC members.

Best regards,
Stephan

Re: [NOTICE] Mandatory migration of git repos to gitbox.apache.org - one week left!

[Stephan Erb]

I finally managed to take a look. Turns out that the `aurora-website.git`is 
unused. 
Apparently it was created but never adopted. Our site is still powered by
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/aurora/site.

I have filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-17797 to get it 
removed.

Best regards,
Stephan



On Wed, 2019-01-30 at 08:10 +, Apache Infrastructure Team wrote:
> Hello again, aurora folks.
> This is a reminder that you have *one week left* before the mandatory
> mass-migration from git-wip-us to gitbox.
> 
> As stated earlier in 2018, and reiterated a few times, all git
> repositories must be migrated from the git-wip-us.apache.org URL to
> gitbox.apache.org, as the old service is being decommissioned. Your
> project is receiving this email because you still have repositories on
> git-wip-us that needs to be migrated.
> 
> The following repositories on git-wip-us belong to your project:
>  - aurora-website.git
> 
> 
> We are now entering the remaining one week of the mandated
> (coordinated) move stage of the roadmap, and you are asked to please
> coordinate migration with the Apache Infrastructure Team before February
> 7th. All repositories not migrated on February 7th will be mass migrated
> without warning, and we'd appreciate it if we could work together to
> avoid a big mess that day :-).
> 
> As stated earlier, moving to gitbox means you will get full write access
> on GitHub as well, and be able to close/merge pull requests and much
> more. The move is mandatory for all Apache projects using git.
> 
> To have your repositories moved, please follow these steps:
> 
> - Ensure consensus on the move (a link to a lists.apache.org thread will
>   suffice for us as evidence).
> - Create a JIRA ticket at 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA
> 
> 
> Your migration should only take a few minutes. If you wish to migrate
> at a specific time of day or date, please do let us know in the ticket,
> otherwise we will migrate at the earliest convenient time.
> 
> There will be redirects in place from git-wip to gitbox, so requests
> using the old remote origins should still work (however we encourage
> people to update their remotes once migration has completed).
> 
> As always, we appreciate your understanding and patience as we move
> things around and work to provide better services and features for
> the Apache Family.
> 
> Should you wish to contact us with feedback or questions, please do so
> at: 
> us...@infra.apache.org
> .
> 
> 
> With regards,
> Apache Infrastructure
> 

Re: nudge on report

[Stephan Erb]

Hi Ted,

I will get back to you within the next 48 hours, so that we can get this 
resolved.

Best regards,
Stephan

On 16.01.19, 20:19, "Ted Dunning"  wrote:

Aurora didn't file a board report this month.

Is there somebody who can commit to corralling a report for next month in
coordination with the PMC chair?

Re: [DISCUSSION] Potential braking change in Mesos 1.6 upgrade - docker thermos based tasks and aurora task ssh

[Stephan Erb]

Hi Renan,

Unfortunately, it might even be a bit more complicated: The executor is 
normally launched as root and then drops the privileges for each Thermos 
process once it got forked successfully. If the Mesos filesystem permissions 
are too narrow, then subsequent operations managed by those processes will 
fail. Most notably, the executor will crash whenever it tries to rotate log 
files. At least this is the behavior of the Mesos containerize before the fix 
you have referenced.

In the Docker case, the executor always runs as root. However, there might even 
be other similar issues that only show up for long running containers. I 
therefore see the broken SSH as a symptom of an underlying issue that we need 
to address. 

Given that this is currently blocking our progress: Should we consider a chmod 
in 
https://github.com/apache/aurora/blob/32776792d273b36afbf4a1bab69a66fb06163ffd/src/main/python/apache/aurora/executor/common/sandbox.py#L173
 to restore the previous umask of 755 for the sandbox directory? 

Best regards,
Stephan

On 16.10.18, 03:47, "Renan DelValle"  wrote:

All,

As you may know Mesos has changed the default permissions for the sandbox
from 755 (-rwxr-xr-x) to 750 (-rwxr-x---) (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-8332).

    Stephan Erb fixed most of the breakage caused by this change with his
recent patch

https://github.com/apache/aurora/commit/32776792d273b36afbf4a1bab69a66fb06163ffd

Unfortunately, when it comes to docker based containers, the issue is a bit
more complicated.

Stephan and I have both looked into this and have been posting our findings
here:
https://github.com/apache/aurora/pull/42

Unfortunately, and I speak for myself here, I don't think there is an easy
way to keep our promise to allow users to aurora task ssh into the sandbox
of a docker container based task.

Problem:

When a docker container is launched, it is launched in its own namespace
and every command is run as root (uid=0) by default. This means two things:

A) None of the users of the host exist inside the container and therefore
we don't know the uid of the role inside the job key.

B) The sandbox for the dockerized task are owned by uid=0 and gid=0 on both
the container and the host.

Before Mesos 1.6, the permissions were open enough to allow aurora task ssh
to see the sandbox of a docker based task on the host.

From Mesos 1.6 on, aurora task ssh will not be able to see anything inside
of the sandbox of a docker based task since by default it is run under
user=role.

tl;dr: default aurora task ssh lacks the permissions to see docker
container based thermos sandboxes.

Solutions:

1. Find a way to mirror host users in container. (Not partial to this as it
adds a lot of complexity)

2. Allow users to provide images with uids that match the local boxes.
(Messy and error prone)

4. Leave as is (broken aurora task ssh for docker container based thermos
sandboxes) and leave it to operators to provide access to these
sandboxes. Users
should still be able to see these files in the sandbox through the Aurora
observer UI and Mesos UI (Sane but potentially burdensome on operators).

I'd love to hear other solutions if anyone else has thought of this problem.

-Renan

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: AuroraBot #159733

[Stephan Erb]

I have disabled the build https://builds.apache.org/job/AuroraBot/ for now in 
order to stop this madness. 

It looks like as if there is a general issue with the Apache build 
infrastructure.

On 28.09.18, 14:34, "Apache Jenkins Server"  wrote:

See 

--
Started by timer
[EnvInject] - Loading node environment variables.
Building remotely on ubuntu-eu2 (ubuntu trusty) in workspace 

 > git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree # timeout=10
Fetching changes from the remote Git repository
 > git config remote.origin.url https://github.com/apache/aurora.git # 
timeout=10
Fetching upstream changes from https://github.com/apache/aurora.git
 > git --version # timeout=10
 > git fetch --tags --progress https://github.com/apache/aurora.git 
+refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
ERROR: Error fetching remote repo 'origin'
hudson.plugins.git.GitException: Failed to fetch from 
https://github.com/apache/aurora.git
at hudson.plugins.git.GitSCM.fetchFrom(GitSCM.java:888)
at hudson.plugins.git.GitSCM.retrieveChanges(GitSCM.java:1155)
at hudson.plugins.git.GitSCM.checkout(GitSCM.java:1186)
at hudson.scm.SCM.checkout(SCM.java:504)
at hudson.model.AbstractProject.checkout(AbstractProject.java:1208)
at 
hudson.model.AbstractBuild$AbstractBuildExecution.defaultCheckout(AbstractBuild.java:574)
at jenkins.scm.SCMCheckoutStrategy.checkout(SCMCheckoutStrategy.java:86)
at 
hudson.model.AbstractBuild$AbstractBuildExecution.run(AbstractBuild.java:499)
at hudson.model.Run.execute(Run.java:1794)
at hudson.model.FreeStyleBuild.run(FreeStyleBuild.java:43)
at hudson.model.ResourceController.execute(ResourceController.java:97)
at hudson.model.Executor.run(Executor.java:429)
Caused by: hudson.plugins.git.GitException: Command "git fetch --tags 
--progress https://github.com/apache/aurora.git 
+refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*" returned status code 128:
stdout: 
stderr: error: missing object referenced by 
'refs/tags/jenkins-AuroraBot-156903'
error: missing object referenced by 'refs/tags/jenkins-AuroraBot-156908'
error: missing object referenced by 'refs/tags/jenkins-AuroraBot-156909'
remote: Enumerating objects: 673, done.
remote: Counting objects:   0% (1/572)   remote: Counting objects:  
 1% (6/572)   remote: Counting objects:   2% (12/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:   3% (18/572)   remote: Counting objects:   4% 
(23/572)   remote: Counting objects:   5% (29/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:   6% (35/572)   remote: Counting objects:   7% 
(41/572)   remote: Counting objects:   8% (46/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:   9% (52/572)   remote: Counting objects:  10% 
(58/572)   remote: Counting objects:  11% (63/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:  12% (69/572)   remote: Counting objects:  13% 
(75/572)   remote: Counting objects:  14% (81/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:  15% (86/572)   remote: Counting objects:  16% 
(92/572)   remote: Counting objects:  17% (98/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:  18% (103/572)   remote: Counting objects:  19% 
(109/572)   remote: Counting objects:  20% (115/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:  21% (121/572)   remote: Counting objects:  22% 
(126/572)   remote: Counting objects:  23% (132/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:  24% (138/572)   remote: Counting objects:  25% 
(143/572)   remote: Counting objects:  26% (149/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:  27% (155/572)   remote: Counting objects:  28% 
(161/572)   remote: Counting objects:  29% (166/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:  30% (172/572)   remote: Counting objects:  31% 
(178/572)   remote: Counting objects:  32% (184/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:  33% (189/572)   remote: Counting objects:  34% 
(195/572)   remote: Counting objects:  35% (201/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:  36% (206/572)   remote: Counting objects:  37% 
(212/572)   remote: Counting objects:  38% (218/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:  39% (224/572)   remote: Counting objects:  40% 
(229/572)   remote: Counting objects:  41% (235/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:  42% (241/572)   remote: Counting objects:  43% 
(246/572)   remote: Counting objects:  44% (252/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:  45% (258/572)   remote: Counting objects:  46% 
(264/572)   remote: Counting objects:  47% (269/572)   remote: 
Counting objects:  48% (275/572)   remote: Counting objects:  

Re: Unofficial Binaries for Aurora 0.21.0

[Stephan Erb]

Thanks a lot for providing those!

On Wed, 2018-09-12 at 13:08 -0700, Renan DelValle wrote:
> All,
> 
> Since we voted to eliminate official binary packages with our last official
> binary release being 0.20.0, I'm providing UNOFFICIAL binary packages for
> the community via my own personal bintray account for 0.21.0
> 
> These unofficial packages were created with
> https://github.com/apache/aurora-packaging/tree/0.21.x
> 
> I've tested these packages using our scripts in aurora-packaging.
> 
> If you run into any issues, please e-mail me personally (not through the
> mailing list).
> 
> The binaries may be found here (they are signed with my GPG key for safety):
> 
> https://dl.bintray.com/rdelvalle/aurora
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -Renan
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.21.0 RC1

[Stephan Erb]

+1 (binding). Release verification has passed for me as well.

On 06.09.18, 23:01, "Renan DelValle"  wrote:

Ran the verify release script, +1 (binding) from me.

On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 2:00 PM Renan DelValle 
wrote:

> All,
>
> I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the official
> Apache Aurora 0.21.0 release.
>
> Aurora 0.21.0-rc1 includes the following:
> ---
> The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
>
> 
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEASE-NOTES.md=rel/0.21.0-rc1
>
> The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
>
> 
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=CHANGELOG=rel/0.21.0-rc1
>
> The tag used to create the release candidate is:
>
> 
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/rel/0.21.0-rc1
>
> The release candidate is available at:
>
> 
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.21.0-rc1/apache-aurora-0.21.0-rc1.tar.gz
>
> The SHA-512 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
>
> 
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.21.0-rc1/apache-aurora-0.21.0-rc1.tar.gz.sha512
>
> The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
>
> 
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.21.0-rc1/apache-aurora-0.21.0-rc1.tar.gz.asc
>
> The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS
>
> Please download, verify, and test.
>
> The vote will close on Sun Sep  9 14:00:00 2018 San Francisco Time
>
> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.21.0
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.21.0 because...
>

Re: svn commit: r1833461 - in /aurora/3rdparty/ubuntu/xenial64/python: mesos.executor-1.5.0-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg mesos.executor-1.5.1-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg

[Stephan Erb]

I have uploaded the Mesos 1.5 eggs for Centos 7, Trusty, and Jessie now. Centos 
6 failed to compile with a segmentation fault in GCC.

Please note though that we have discontinued official Aurora binary packages. 
We therefore might also cut back on these egg builds in the future. If needed 
you can also always build your own executor eggs using one of our helper 
scripts:  `./build-support/python/make-mesos-native-egg centos7 1.5.0 
output_dir`

Kind regards,
Stephan

On 14.06.18, 04:42, "thinker0"  wrote:

Please register for centos 6,7.

2018년 6월 13일 (수) 오후 9:55, 님이 작성:

> Author: serb
> Date: Wed Jun 13 12:55:47 2018
> New Revision: 1833461
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1833461=rev
> Log:
> Adding mesos 1.5 eggs for xenial64.
>
> Added:
>
> 
aurora/3rdparty/ubuntu/xenial64/python/mesos.executor-1.5.0-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg
>  (with props)
>
> 
aurora/3rdparty/ubuntu/xenial64/python/mesos.executor-1.5.1-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg
>  (with props)
>
> Added:
> 
aurora/3rdparty/ubuntu/xenial64/python/mesos.executor-1.5.0-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg
> URL:
> 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/aurora/3rdparty/ubuntu/xenial64/python/mesos.executor-1.5.0-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg?rev=1833461=auto
>
> 
==
> Binary file - no diff available.
>
> Propchange:
> 
aurora/3rdparty/ubuntu/xenial64/python/mesos.executor-1.5.0-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg
>
> 
--
> svn:mime-type = application/octet-stream
>
> Added:
> 
aurora/3rdparty/ubuntu/xenial64/python/mesos.executor-1.5.1-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg
> URL:
> 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/aurora/3rdparty/ubuntu/xenial64/python/mesos.executor-1.5.1-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg?rev=1833461=auto
>
> 
==
> Binary file - no diff available.
>
> Propchange:
> 
aurora/3rdparty/ubuntu/xenial64/python/mesos.executor-1.5.1-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg
>
> 
--
> svn:mime-type = application/octet-stream
>
>
>

Re: Massive instance rescheduling outage upon traffic spike

[Stephan Erb]

Hey Tengfei,

the Aurora health checks cannot differentiate a service instance which has 
deadlocked from one which is extremely slow. The decision to restart is then 
performed by the executor without central coordination by the scheduler. Your 
best course of action will therefore be to prevent the overload in the first 
place, for example via load shedding and graceful degradation. You can find 
further details in the Google SRE Book [1].

Specifically, you will want to do tight(er) health checking in your 
loadbalancers, so that instances drop out of rotation before they hit their 
capacity limit. In addition, I have had a good experience by also protecting 
instance with a limiting HAProxy/Nginx that runs as a side-car within Aurora 
tasks.

I hope this gets you started.

Best regards,
Stephan

[1] 
https://landing.google.com/sre/book/chapters/addressing-cascading-failures.html


On 18.06.18, 21:45, "Tengfei Mu"  wrote:

Hi,

We have had a few incidents when service under unexpected traffic/load
spike then container starts to respond slow/fail health check, which caused
massive instance rescheduling in Aurora. This could be a bad cycle that
instances rescheduled (being started) causing more load on other instances,
then more and more instances hammered down. Any one can share some best
practice/lessons for preventing such outage caused by dynamic rescheduling
in production cluster?


Best,
Tengfei

Re: [NOTICE] Aurora is moving to Apache GitBox

[Stephan Erb]

Thanks for driving this effort! I am looking forward to the change, as
it hopefully makes it easier for new contributors.


On Tue, 2018-06-19 at 13:21 -0700, Renan DelValle wrote:
> All,
> 
> The vote to move from the legacy ASF git hosting to the GitBox service has
> passed. When we finish our move we cannot guarantee that the the legacy ASF
> git repository will continue to be operational. Thus, I encourage users to
> evaluate dependencies and prepare to make changes accordingly.
> 
> As we transition from our ReviewBoard workflow to our GitHub based workflow
> we will be doing our best to keep the turbulence to a minimum but
> unforeseen challenges may rise up.
> 
> I ask that users bear with us and report any issues they encounter during
> and after our transition. I'd also like to ask for help updating our
> documentation to reflect our change in workflow once the migration is over.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> -Renan
> 

Re: Recovery instructions updates

[Stephan Erb]

That sounds indeed concerning. Would be great if you could file an issue and 
attach the related log files and tracebacks.

Bill recently added a potential replacement for the existing restore mechanism: 
https://github.com/apache/aurora/commit/2e1ca42887bc8ea1e8c6cddebe9d1cf29268c714.
 Given the set of issues you have bumped into with the current restore, this 
new approach might be worth exploring further.

On 03.06.18, 08:43, "Meghdoot bhattacharya"  
wrote:

Thx Renan for sharing the details. This backup restore happened under not 
so easy circumstances, so would encourage the leads to keep docs updated as 
much as possible and include in release validation.

The other issue of snapshots having task and other objects as nil that 
causes to fail the schedulers, we have now seen 2 times in past year. Other 
than finding root cause why that entry happens during snapshot creation, there 
needs to be defensive code either to ignore that entry on loading or a way to 
fix the snapshot. Because we might have to go through a days worth of snapshots 
to find which one did not had that entry and recover from there. Mean time to 
recover gets impacted under the circumstances. One extra info not sure is 
relevant or not is the corrupted snapshot got created by the admin cli 
(assumption should not matter whether scheduler triggers or forced via cli) 
that showed success as well as the aurora logs but then loading it exposed the 
issue.

Thx

> On Jun 2, 2018, at 3:54 PM, Renan DelValle  
wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> We tried following the recovery instructions from
> http://aurora.apache.org/documentation/latest/operations/backup-restore/
> 
> After our change from the Twitter commons ZK library to Apache Curator,
> these instructions are no longer valid.
> 
> In order for Aurora to carry out a leader election in the current state,
> Aurora has to first connect to a Mesos master. What we ended up doing was
> connecting to Mesos master that was had nothing on it to bypass this new
> requirement.
> 
> Next, wiping away -native_log_file_path did not seem to be enough to
> recover from a corrupted mesos replicated log. We had to manually wipe 
away
> entries in ZK and move the snapshot backup directory in order for the
> leader to not fall back on either a snapshot or the mesos-log to rehydrate
> the leader.
> 
> Finally, somehow triggering a manual snapshot generated a snapshot with an
> invalid entry which then caused the scheduler to fail after a failover
> while trying to catch up on current state.
> 
> We are trying to investigate why this took place (it could have been we
> didn't give the system enough time to finish hydrating the snapshot), but
> the invalid entry which looked something like a Task with all null or 0
> values, caused our leaders to fail (which necessitated restoring from an
> earlier snapshot) and note that this was only after we triggered the 
manual
> snapshot and BEFORE we tried to restore.
> 
> Will report more details as they become available and will provide some 
doc
> updates based on our experience.
> 
> -Renan

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.20.x packages

[Stephan Erb]

+1 for the release as is 

Am 3. Mai 2018 21:05:32 MESZ schrieb Renan DelValle :
>All,
>
>Do we want to keep the vote open or should I close it as failed? It's
>been
>nearly a month since I called it.
>
>I am +1 for making these the official packages as I haven't encountered
>any
>problem with them so far.
>
>If we could get two more PMC members to vote so we can close this vote
>that'd be great!
>
>-Renan
>
>On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 6:35 PM, Renan DelValle 
>wrote:
>
>> Friendly reminder that this vote is still open, please vote!
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 6:40 PM, Renan DelValle 
>wrote:
>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> I propose that we accept the following artifacts as the official deb
>and
>>> rpm packaging for
>>> Apache Aurora 0.20.x:
>>>
>>> https://dl.bintray.com/rdelvalle/aurora/
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> The branch used to create the packaging is:
>>> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging
>>> .git;a=tree;hb=refs/heads/0.20.x
>>>
>>> The packages are available at:
>>> https://dl.bintray.com/rdelvalle/aurora/
>>>
>>> The GPG keys used to sign the packages are available at:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/aurora/KEYS
>>>
>>> Please download, verify, and test. Detailed test instructions are
>>> available here:
>>> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging
>>> .git;a=tree;f=test;hb=refs/heads/0.20.x
>>>
>>>
>>> The vote will close on Mon Apr  9 18:45:00 PDT 2018 or later
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Release these as the deb and rpm packages for Apache Aurora
>0.20.x
>>> [ ] +0
>>> [ ] -1 Do not release these artifacts because...
>>>
>>
>>

Docker Improvements

[Stephan Erb]

Hi everyone,

there are two interesting patches up for review that improve the docker
functionality in Aurora.


If anyone is invested into Docker, please have a look!


Adding enhancements to Docker functionality and client support for
FetcherURIs
https://reviews.apache.org/r/66537


Implement Mesos docker/volume isolator support for Aurora
https://reviews.apache.org/r/66490


Best regards,
Stephan

Re: I need help with Homebrew.

[Stephan Erb]

Hey :)

certain Python + SSL variants on MacOS can have difficulties connection
to the Python package index.

Please try to patch https://github.com/apache/aurora/blob/master/pants#
L35 to use virtualenv==15.2.0. 

You can leave the pants version at 1.4.0.dev23, which is the one we
have been using for Aurora 0.20 and master.

I hope this helps. 


On Fri, 2018-04-06 at 11:05 +, thinker0 wrote:
> I am uploading aurora-cli to Homebrew.
> 
> https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/pull/26134
> 
> https://jenkins.brew.sh/job/Homebrew%20Core%20Pull%20Requests/21767/
> 
> *el_capitan*, *sierra* will continue to fail. Pants What version should I
> use?
> 
> *09:39:37* New python executable in
> /private/tmp/aurora-cli-20180406-91064-dupjge/apache-aurora-0.20.0/.brew_home/.cache/pants/setup/bootstrap-Darwin-x86_64/pants.LOLmud/install/bin/python*09:39:37*
> Installing setuptools, pip, wheel...done.*09:39:37* Collecting
> pantsbuild.pants==1.4.0*09:39:37*   Could not find a version that
> satisfies the requirement pantsbuild.pants==1.4.0 (from versions:
> )*09:39:37* No matching distribution found for
> pantsbuild.pants==1.4.0*09:39:37* ./pants: line 99:
> /private/tmp/aurora-cli-20180406-91064-dupjge/apache-aurora-0.20.0/.brew_home/.cache/pants/setup/bootstrap-Darwin-x86_64/1.4.0/bin/python:
> No such file or directory*09:39:37*

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.20.0 RC1

[Stephan Erb]

This test seems to pass for me. Maybe some flaky behaviour?

On Thu, 2018-03-29 at 14:09 -0700, Renan DelValle wrote:
> On my second round of verification, integration tests are getting stuck at:
> 
> src/test/python/apache/thermos/monitoring/test_disk.py::TestMesosDiskCollector::test_mesos_disk_collector_bad_api_path
> 
> Can anyone else confirm if this happens to them as well?
> 
> -Renan
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 1:43 AM, Stephan Erb <stephan@blue-yonder.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > +1
> > 
> > Verification script has passed for me now.
> > 
> > On 28.03.18, 21:30, "Renan DelValle" <re...@apache.org> wrote:
> > 
> > All,
> > 
> > 
> > I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the
> > official
> > 
> > Apache Aurora 0.20.0 release.
> > 
> > 
> > Aurora 0.20.0-rc1 includes the following:
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> > The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
> > 
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=
> > RELEASE-NOTES.md=rel/0.20.0-rc1
> > 
> > 
> > The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
> > 
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=
> > CHANGELOG=rel/0.20.0-rc1
> > 
> > 
> > The tag used to create the release candidate is:
> > 
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=
> > shortlog;h=refs/tags/rel/0.20.0-rc1
> > 
> > 
> > The release candidate is available at:
> > 
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.20.0-rc1/
> > apache-aurora-0.20.0-rc1.tar.gz
> > 
> > 
> > The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
> > 
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.20.0-rc1/
> > apache-aurora-0.20.0-rc1.tar.gz.md5
> > 
> > 
> > The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
> > 
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.20.0-rc1/
> > apache-aurora-0.20.0-rc1.tar.gz.asc
> > 
> > 
> > The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
> > 
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS
> > 
> > 
> > Please download, verify, and test.
> > 
> > 
> > The vote will close on or after Sun Mar  31 12:30:00 PST 2018
> > 
> > 
> > [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.20.0
> > 
> > [ ] +0
> > 
> > [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.20.0 because...
> > 
> > 
> > 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.20.0 RC1

[Stephan Erb]

+1

Verification script has passed for me now. 

On 28.03.18, 21:30, "Renan DelValle"  wrote:

All,


I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the official

Apache Aurora 0.20.0 release.


Aurora 0.20.0-rc1 includes the following:

---

The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:


https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEASE-NOTES.md=rel/0.20.0-rc1


The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:


https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=CHANGELOG=rel/0.20.0-rc1


The tag used to create the release candidate is:


https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/rel/0.20.0-rc1


The release candidate is available at:


https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.20.0-rc1/apache-aurora-0.20.0-rc1.tar.gz


The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:


https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.20.0-rc1/apache-aurora-0.20.0-rc1.tar.gz.md5


The signature of the release candidate can be found at:


https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.20.0-rc1/apache-aurora-0.20.0-rc1.tar.gz.asc


The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS


Please download, verify, and test.


The vote will close on or after Sun Mar  31 12:30:00 PST 2018


[ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.20.0

[ ] +0

[ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.20.0 because...

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.20.0 RC0

[Stephan Erb]

Unfortunately, I am unable to get the end-to-end tests to pass, even after a 
full `vagrant destroy && git clean -xfd`.

 Things I have seen fail:

• Failures of the curl disabling Mesos maintenance schedules
• Can't check signature: public key not found

I have tested on two different computers to rule out a bad setup, but both 
errors have shown up a couple of times now. Could it be that the Vagrant update 
has introduced some issues here?


On 07.03.18, 21:44, "Renan DelValle"  wrote:

Reminder that the vote for 0.20.0 is still open.

Kicking off the vote with a +1 from me.

On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 4:39 PM, Renan DelValle  wrote:

> All,
>
> I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the official
> Apache Aurora 0.20.0 release.
>
> Aurora 0.20.0-rc0 includes the following:
> ---
> The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=
> RELEASE-NOTES.md=rel/0.20.0-rc0
>
> The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=
> CHANGELOG=rel/0.20.0-rc0
>
> The tag used to create the release candidate is:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=
> shortlog;h=refs/tags/rel/0.20.0-rc0
>
> The release candidate is available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.20.0-rc0/
> apache-aurora-0.20.0-rc0.tar.gz
>
> The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.20.0-rc0/
> apache-aurora-0.20.0-rc0.tar.gz.md5
>
> The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.20.0-rc0/
> apache-aurora-0.20.0-rc0.tar.gz.asc
>
> The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS
>
> Please download, verify, and test.
>
> The vote will close on Sun Mar  4 16:35:59 PST 2018
>
> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.20.0
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.20.0 because...
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.19.x packages

[Stephan Erb]

+1 

On 21.02.18, 20:01, "David McLaughlin"  wrote:

+1 from me.

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 9:57 AM, Renan DelValle  wrote:

> Another friendly reminder that we can't release the binary packages for
> 0.19.x without at least three +1 binding votes.
>
> Not releasing a package for 0.19.x will create a problem for anyone trying
> to upgrade to later versions as we recommend upgrading version by version.
>
>  Any and all feedback regarding these binary packages, binding or
> otherwise, is welcome so that we may fix any issues that crop up.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Renan
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 8:43 AM, Renan DelValle  wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > Friendly reminder to download, verify, and test so we can conclude the
> > voting!
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > -Renan
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Renan DelValle 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Kicking off the voting with a +1 (binding) from me.
> >>
> >> Tested all distributions using the test scripts.
> >>
> >> -Renan
> >>
> >> On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 1:35 PM, Renan DelValle 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> All,
> >>>
> >>> I propose that we accept the following artifacts as the official deb
> and
> >>> rpm packaging for
> >>> Apache Aurora 0.19.x:
> >>>
> >>> https://dl.bintray.com/rdelvalle/aurora/
> >>>
> >>> The Aurora deb and rpm packaging includes the following:
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>>
> >>> The branch used to create the packaging is:
> >>> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging
> >>> .git;a=tree;hb=refs/heads/0.19.x
> >>>
> >>> The packages are available at:
> >>> https://dl.bintray.com/rdelvalle/aurora/
> >>>
> >>> The GPG keys used to sign the packages are available at:
> >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/aurora/KEYS
> >>>
> >>> Please download, verify, and test. Detailed test instructions are
> >>> available here:
> >>> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging
> >>> .git;a=tree;f=test;hb=refs/heads/0.19.x
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The vote will close on Wed Feb 14 13:35:18 PST 2018
> >>>
> >>> [ ] +1 Release these as the deb and rpm packages for Apache Aurora
> 0.19.x
> >>> [ ] +0
> >>> [ ] -1 Do not release these artifacts because...
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.19.1 RC0

[Stephan Erb]

+1 (binding)

On 09.02.18, 02:02, "Bill Farner"  wrote:

+1, binding

I did encounter a unit test failure, but maintain my +1 as this test case
has been notorious flaky on macOS 10.13.3 (especially for me, apparently).
All other checks in the verification script pass.

   def _run_collector_tests(collector, target, wait):
 assert collector.value == 0

 collector.sample()
 wait()
 assert collector.value == 0

 f1 = make_file(TEST_AMOUNT_1, dir=target)
 wait()
   > assert collector.value >= TEST_AMOUNT_1.as_(Data.BYTES)
   E assert 100728832 >= 104857600.0
   E  +  where 100728832 =
.value
   E  +  and   104857600.0 = ()
   E  +where  =
Amount(100, MB).as_
   E  +and=
Data.BYTES

   src/test/python/apache/thermos/monitoring/test_disk.py:44: AssertionError

On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Renan DelValle 
wrote:

> This point release fixes the list arg parsing regression experienced due 
to
> switching to JCommander so that we may release binary packages for 0.19.x
>
> Kicking off the voting with a +1 from me.
>
> Validated with ./build-support/release/verify-release-candidate 0.19.1-rc0
>
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 3:37 PM, Renan DelValle 
> wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the official
> > Apache Aurora 0.19.1 release.
> >
> > Aurora 0.19.1-rc0 includes the following:
> > ---
> > The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEA
> > SE-NOTES.md=rel/0.19.1-rc0
> >
> > The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=CHANG
> > ELOG=rel/0.19.1-rc0
> >
> > The tag used to create the release candidate is:
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=short
> > log;h=refs/tags/rel/0.19.1-rc0
> >
> > The release candidate is available at:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.19.1-rc0/apa
> > che-aurora-0.19.1-rc0.tar.gz
> >
> > The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.19.1-rc0/apa
> > che-aurora-0.19.1-rc0.tar.gz.md5
> >
> > The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.19.1-rc0/apa
> > che-aurora-0.19.1-rc0.tar.gz.asc
> >
> > The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS
> >
> > Please download, verify, and test.
> >
> > The vote will close on Sat Feb 10 14:00:33 PST 2018
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.19.1
> > [ ] +0
> > [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.19.1 because...
> >
>

Re: Aurora 0.20.0 Release Date

[Stephan Erb]

I think this is a good idea. Development has slowed down enough that it should 
not be difficult to cut a release.

On 09.02.18, 02:49, "Renan DelValle"  wrote:

All,

Since Mesos has shipped version 1.5.0 today, should we consider releasing
0.20.0 (which supports Mesos 1.4.0) so we don't fall too far behind in
terms of Mesos compatibility?

-Renan

Re: Welcome new committers and PMC member!

[Stephan Erb]

Congratulations and welcome! 


On Tue, 2018-02-06 at 12:11 -0800, Manivannan wrote:
> Welcome Renan and Jordan!
> 
> On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Bill Farner  wrote:
> 
> > Folks,
> > 
> > I'm happy to announce that we have two new developers on the project!
> > 
> > Renan DelValle is now a committer and PMC member
> > 
> > Jordan Ly is now a committer
> > 
> > 
> > Welcome aboard, we're looking forward to your continued contributions!
> > 
> > 
> > -=Bill
> > 

Re: [REPORT] Apache Aurora - December 2017

[Stephan Erb]

Thanks!

On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 09:34 -0500, Jake Farrell wrote:
> Please find below the draft report for December, if anyone has any
> modifications or additions please let me know
> 
> -Jake
> 
> 
> 
> Apache Aurora is a stateless and fault tolerant service scheduler
> used to
> schedule jobs onto Apache Mesos such as long-running services, cron
> jobs, 
> and one off tasks.
> 
> Project Status
> -
> The Apache Aurora community has seen a huge growth from new  
> contributors and user activity over the last quarter. We have
> successfully
> released two new versions of Apache Aurora during this time also,
> 0.18.1 security release to address CVE-2016-4437 [1] and a regular
> planned release of 0.19.0.
> 
> Community
> ---
> Latest Additions:
> 
> * Committer addition: Santhosh Kumar Shanmugham, 2.9.2017
> * PMC addition:  Mehrdad Nurolahzade, 2.24.2017
> 
> Issue backlog status since last report:
> 
> * Created:   17
> * Resolved: 22
> 
> Mailing list activity since last report:
> 
> * @dev 140 messages
> * @user112 messages (3 in previous reporting cycle!!)
> * @reviews   1207 messages
> 
> Releases
> ---
> Last release: 
> * Apache Aurora 0.18.1 released 10.31.2017. Security release
> * Apache Aurora 0.19.0 released 11.9.2017
> 
> [1]: https://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2016-4437/
> 
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.19.x packages

[Stephan Erb]

I was just trying to run the validation scripts for Debian Jessie and
those are failing with the error:


I1210 20:48:36.172399  7371 fetcher.cpp:283] Fetching directly into the
sandbox directory
I1210 20:48:36.172417  7371 fetcher.cpp:220] Fetching URI ''
Failed to fetch '': A relative path was passed for the resource but the
Mesos framework home was not specified. Please either provide this
config option or avoid using a relative path

End fetcher log for container 48b4029a-231d-441a-98a6-8c6538fe0efa
E1210 20:48:36.220979  5590 fetcher.cpp:558] Failed to run mesos-
fetcher: Failed to fetch all URIs for container '48b4029a-231d-441a-
98a6-8c6538fe0efa' with exit status: 256
E1210 20:48:36.221174  5590 slave.cpp:4650] Container '48b4029a-231d-
441a-98a6-8c6538fe0efa' for executor 'thermos-vagrant-test-hello_world-
0-74b87db4-0d97-4d03-a7f9-9482a1060f20' of framework 208bd6e7-5d17-
4257-9564-71af57900310- fail
ed to start: Failed to fetch all URIs for container '48b4029a-231d-
441a-98a6-8c6538fe0efa' with exit status: 256


Did those tests work for you?


In addition, but most probably unrelated, the branch is missing on http
s://github.com/apache/aurora-packaging. The ASF bot might have missed
it.


On Fri, 2017-12-08 at 10:50 -0800, Bill Farner wrote:
> All,
> 
> I propose that we accept the following artifacts as the official deb
> and
> rpm packaging for
> Apache Aurora 0.19.x:
> 
> https://dl.bintray.com/bill/aurora/
> 
> The Aurora deb and rpm packaging includes the following:
> 
> ---
> 
> The branch used to create the packaging is:
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=tr
> ee;hb=refs/heads/0.19.x
> 
> The packages are available at:
> https://dl.bintray.com/wfarner/aurora/
> 
> The GPG keys used to sign the packages are available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/aurora/KEYS
> 
> Please download, verify, and test. Detailed test instructions are
> available
> here:
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=tr
> ee;f=test;hb=refs/heads/0.19.x
> 
> 
> The vote will close on Wed Dec 13 10:34:51 PST 2017
> 
> [ ] +1 Release these as the deb and rpm packages for Apache Aurora
> 0.19.x
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release these artifacts because...

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: Aurora #1858

[Stephan Erb]

Actually there was never a discussion. I just enabled it as a test and
then totally forgot about it because it worked surprisingly well.

I believe we won't use more than 1-2 GB. I simply added the remaining 2
as an additional safeguard when something else is launched on the
Jenkins node shortly after we have passed the guard.

On Tue, 2017-10-24 at 21:38 -0700, Bill Farner wrote:
> Possibly rehashing an old discussion - does the build really require
> 4 GB?
> 
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Erb, Stephan  r.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Ah, again a node with insufficient memory. I once added a mechanism
> > to
> > abort the build early rather than running and eventually failing in
> > these
> > cases. This was very helpful for the regular reviewbot but is not
> > that
> > helpful for the normal SCM-triggerd build.
> > 
> > Can anyone think of a better way to handle this case here?
> > 
> > 
> > On 23.10.17, 22:02, "Apache Jenkins Server"  > org>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > See  > redirect?page=changes>
> > 
> > Changes:
> > 
> > [david] Add sorting and filtering controls for TaskList
> > 
> > --
> > Started by an SCM change
> > Started by an SCM change
> > [EnvInject] - Loading node environment variables.
> > Building remotely on ubuntu-4 (ubuntu trusty) in workspace <
> > https://builds.apache.org/job/Aurora/ws/>;
> > Wiping out workspace first.
> > Cloning the remote Git repository
> > Cloning repository https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/auro
> > ra.git
> >  > git init  #
> > timeout=10
> > Fetching upstream changes from https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> > repos/asf/aurora.git
> >  > git --version # timeout=10
> >  > git fetch --tags --progress https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> > repos/asf/aurora.git +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
> >  > git config remote.origin.url https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> > repos/asf/aurora.git # timeout=10
> >  > git config --add remote.origin.fetch
> > +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
> > # timeout=10
> >  > git config remote.origin.url https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> > repos/asf/aurora.git # timeout=10
> > Fetching upstream changes from https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> > repos/asf/aurora.git
> >  > git fetch --tags --progress https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> > repos/asf/aurora.git +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
> >  > git rev-parse origin/master^{commit} # timeout=10
> > Checking out Revision 5b91150fd0668c23b178d80516427763764ac2d3
> > (origin/master)
> > Commit message: "Add sorting and filtering controls for
> > TaskList"
> >  > git config core.sparsecheckout # timeout=10
> >  > git checkout -f 5b91150fd0668c23b178d80516427763764ac2d3
> >  > git rev-list ec640117c273f51e26089cd83ba325be9e8a0e89 #
> > timeout=10
> > Cleaning workspace
> >  > git rev-parse --verify HEAD # timeout=10
> > Resetting working tree
> >  > git reset --hard # timeout=10
> >  > git clean -fdx # timeout=10
> > [Aurora] $ /bin/bash -xe /tmp/jenkins2427407600627764864.sh
> > + export HOME=
> > + HOME=
> > ++ awk '/^MemAvailable:/{print $2}' /proc/meminfo
> > + available_mem_k=
> > + echo
> > 
> > + threshold_mem_k=4194304
> > + ((  threshold_mem_k > available_mem_k  ))
> > + echo 'Less than 4 GiB memory available. Bailing.'
> > Less than 4 GiB memory available. Bailing.
> > + exit 1
> > Build step 'Execute shell' marked build as failure
> > Recording test results
> > ERROR: Step ?Publish JUnit test result report? failed: No test
> > report
> > files were found. Configuration error?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.18.1 RC1

[Stephan Erb]

+1

Thanks for handling this, Bill.

On Mon, 2017-10-30 at 10:05 -0500, Joshua Cohen wrote:
> +1
> 
> On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Bill Farner 
> wrote:
> 
> > > 
> > > sha512 signature
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks, this is now fixed.  The release script runs from the
> > released SHA,
> > which pre-dates the inclusion of a sha512 signature.  The
> > verification
> > script on master should otherwise work against 0.18.1-rc1, but no
> > guarantees.
> > 
> > On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Joshua Cohen 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > I'm trying to run the verify-release-candidate script, but
> > > getting a 404
> > > for the sha512 signature?
> > > 
> > > + download_rc_file apache-aurora-0.18.1-rc1.tar.gz.sha512
> > > + download_dist_file 0.18.1-rc1/apache-aurora-0.18.1-
> > > rc1.tar.gz.sha512
> > > + curl -f -O
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.18.1-rc1/
> > > apache-aurora-0.18.1-rc1.tar.gz.sha512
> > >   % Total% Received % Xferd  Average
> > > Speed   TimeTime Time
> > > Current
> > >  Dload  Upload   Total   Spent   
> > >  Left
> > > Speed
> > >   0 00 00 0  0  0 --:--:-- --:--:--
> > > --:--:--
> > >  0
> > > curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404 Not Found
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Bill Farner 
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > +1
> > > > 
> > > > Verified by running ./build-support/release/verify-release-
> > > > candidate
> > > > 0.18.1-rc1
> > > > 
> > > > On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 12:05 PM, David McLaughlin <
> > > 
> > > dmclaugh...@apache.org
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > +1
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Bill Farner  > > > > .org>
> > > > 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > All,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I propose that we accept the following release candidate as
> > > > > > the
> > > > 
> > > > official
> > > > > > Apache Aurora 0.18.1 release.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Aurora 0.18.1-rc1 includes the following:
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
> > > > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=
> > > > > > RELEASE-NOTES.md=rel/0.18.1-rc1
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
> > > > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=
> > > > > > CHANGELOG=rel/0.18.1-rc1
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The tag used to create the release candidate is:
> > > > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=
> > > > > > shortlog;h=refs/tags/rel/0.18.1-rc1
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The release candidate is available at:
> > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.18.1-rc1/
> > > > > > apache-aurora-0.18.1-rc1.tar.gz
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
> > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.18.1-rc1/
> > > > > > apache-aurora-0.18.1-rc1.tar.gz.md5
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
> > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.18.1-rc1/
> > > > > > apache-aurora-0.18.1-rc1.tar.gz.asc
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
> > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Please download, verify, and test.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The vote will close on Wed Nov  1 10:31:07 PDT 2017
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.18.1
> > > > > > [ ] +0
> > > > > > [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.18.1
> > > > > > because...
> > > > > > 

Re: Redesign of the Aurora UI

[Stephan Erb]

+1 for switching to react. I believe this will reduce maintenance
effort for us in the long term. 

On Fri, 2017-09-22 at 15:19 -0700, David McLaughlin wrote:
> Just a heads up: Facebook have decided to relicense React and Jest as
> MIT:
> 
> https://code.facebook.com/posts/300798627056246
> 
> So I'll be adopting React and dropping the Preact-compat stuff asap.
> The
> effect to our application code is minimal (if any), but tests will
> need to
> be rewritten. So I'll probably hold off on further patches until the
> relicense is complete.
> 
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 8:13 PM, David McLaughlin  com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Good to know they made the decision. My plan is to move forward
> > with
> > Preact, with the major question how to do unit testing since we
> > can't use
> > jest either. The first patch should land early next week.
> > 
> > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 6:29 PM, Joshua Cohen 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > FB came back w/ their response to relicense React today:
> > > https://code.facebook.com/posts/112130496157735/explaining-
> > > react-s-license
> > > 
> > > tl;dr: they're not relicensing React. So... if we do go down this
> > > path,
> > > we'll have to investigate alternatives to React (Preact, Vue,
> > > etc.) or
> > > potentially release this as a separate project outside of the ASF
> > > that can
> > > serve as a drop in UI replacement.
> > > 
> > > On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 4:48 PM, Erb, Stephan <
> > > stephan@blue-yonder.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > A big +1 from me as well. We have not touched or updated the
> > > > existing UI
> > > > for quite some time, which is a bad sign for code health.
> > > > 
> > > > I would even be OK with a couple of bigger initial code dumps.
> > > > I am not
> > > > really a web-developer, so a working piece of code to play
> > > > around with
> > > > would probably be the fastest way to get up to speed with the
> > > > tech and
> > > 
> > > its
> > > > usage in Aurora.
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks a lot for driving this, David!
> > > > 
> > > > On 21.07.17, 07:00, "Kai Huang" 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > David - Sure, let's sync on the work when you are ready.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > From: David McLaughlin 
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 14:10
> > > > To: dev@aurora.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: Redesign of the Aurora UI
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks for the feedback!
> > > > 
> > > > Joshua - I haven't tried to drop in Preact yet, but I was
> > > > also
> > > > planning to
> > > > throw away the prototype and starting again when it came to
> > > > upstreaming it,
> > > > so as part of that we can just address incompatibilities as
> > > > we go.
> > > 
> > > If
> > > > I was
> > > > to guess, then the only significant impact on my prototype
> > > > would
> > > > probably
> > > > be the reactable plugin I was using (replacement for
> > > > Angular's
> > > > smart-table). But longer term I do have concerns about
> > > > moving away
> > > 
> > > from
> > > > what is a constantly improving and healthy ecosystem around
> > > > React.
> > > 
> > > So
> > > > most
> > > > likely I'll hold off until a decision is made there one way
> > > > or the
> > > > other
> > > > (which should be within a week).
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Kai - I'd be happy to coordinate and collaborate on this
> > > > with
> > > 
> > > others.
> > > > Let
> > > > me try and finish up the CSS/UX of the pages in my
> > > > prototype and
> > > 
> > > from
> > > > there
> > > > we can sync on who does what. Does that sound good?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Kai Huang <
> > > 
> > > texasred2...@hotmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Just a few thoughts as an aurora developer and operator:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > From my experiences with Aurora users, some persisting
> > > > complaints
> > > > are:
> > > > >
> > > > >   1.  The current UI is not very intuitive for the users
> > > > to
> > > > understand the
> > > > > task lifecycle, resource utilization of their job.
> > > > >   2.  Often times users are unaware of the new
> > > > features/changes in
> > > > Aurora
> > > > > Scheduler/Executor, which leads to a lot of misuse of the
> > > > system.
> > > > >   3.  Users have preferences on the appearance of the
> > > > scheduler/thermos UI
> > > > > due to special use cases, and ask us to customize for
> > > > them(or
> > > 
> > > start
> > > > to
> > > > > write their own UI, which is often not recommended).
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The other major issue I see in the current UI is that
> > > > it's built
> > > 
> > > on
> > > > an
> > > > > obsolete tech stack(AngularJS) that has all the binaries
> > > > and
> > > > dependencies
> > > > > in the repo. From 

Re: [REPORT] Apache Aurora - Sept 2017

[Stephan Erb]

Thank you, Jake!


On Tue, 2017-09-12 at 11:31 -0400, Jake Farrell wrote:
> Apache Aurora is a stateless and fault tolerant service scheduler
> used to
> schedule jobs onto Apache Mesos such as long-running services, cron
> jobs,
> and one off tasks.
> 
> Project Status
> -
> The Apache Aurora community has continued to see growth from new
> contributors over the last quarter while working on our latest 0.18.0
> release,
> which was successfully released on June 19th, 2017. There has been a
> great
> open discussions occurring on the mailing lists surrounding hot
> standby in
> replicas to reduce failover time and a design doc has been proposed.
> 
> Community
> ---
> Latest Additions:
> 
> * Committer addition: Santhosh Kumar Shanmugham, 2.9.2017
> * PMC addition:  Mehrdad Nurolahzade, 2.24.2017
> 
> Issue backlog status since last report:
> 
> * Created:   11
> * Resolved: 14
> 
> Mailing list activity since last report:
> 
> * @dev 114 messages
> * @user3 messages
> * @reviews   317 messages
> 
> Releases
> ---
> Last release: Apache Aurora 0.18.0 released 06.19.2017

Re: Aurora reconciliation and Master fail over

[Stephan Erb]

Reconciliation in Aurora is not a specific mode. It just runs
concurrently to other background work such as snapshots or backups [1].
 

Just be aware that we don't have metrics to track the runtime of
explicit and implicit reconciliations. If you use settings that are
overly aggressive, you might overload Auroras queue of incoming Mesos
status updates (for example). 

[1] https://github.com/apache/aurora/blob/c85bffdd6f68312261697eee868d5
7069adda434/src/main/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/reconciliation/Ta
skReconciler.java 


On Sat, 2017-07-15 at 22:28 -0700, Meghdoot bhattacharya wrote:
> Thx David for the follow up and confirmation.
> We have started the thread on the mesos dev DL.
> 
> So to get clarification on the recon, what is in general effect
> during the recon. Does scheduling and activities like snapshot is
> paused as recon takes place. Trying to see whether to run aggressive
> recon in mean time.
> 
> Thx
> 
> > On Jul 15, 2017, at 9:33 AM, David McLaughlin  > rg> wrote:
> > 
> > I've left a comment on the initial RB detailing how the change
> > broke
> > backwards-compatibility. Given that the tasks are marked as lost as
> > soon as
> > the agent reregisters after slaveLost is sent anyway, there doesn't
> > seem to
> > be any reason not to send TASK_LOST too. I think this should be an
> > easy
> > fix.
> > 
> > On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 9:21 AM, David McLaughlin  > he.org>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Yes, we've confirmed this internally too (Santhosh did the work
> > > here):
> > > 
> > > When an agent becomes unreachable while the master is running, it
> > > sends
> > > > TASK_LOST events for each task on the agent.
> > > > https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/33093c893773f8c9d293afe
> > > > 38e9909f9a2868d32/src/master/master.cpp#L7066-L7107
> > > > Marking agent unreachable after failover does not cause
> > > > TASK_LOST events.
> > > > https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/33093c893773f8c9d293afe
> > > > 38e9909f9a2868d32/src/master/master.cpp#L2036-L2070
> > > > Once an agent re-registers it sends TASK_LOST events. Agent
> > > > sending
> > > > TASK_LOST for tasks that it does not know after a Master
> > > > failover.
> > > > https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/33093c893773f8c9d293afe
> > > > 38e9909f9a2868d32/src/slave/slave.cpp#L1324-L1383
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The separate code path for markUnreachableAfterFailover appears
> > > to have
> > > been added by this commit:
> > > https://github.com/apache/mesos/commit/937c85f2f6528d1ac56ea9a7aa
> > > 174c
> > > a0bd371d0c
> > > 
> > > And I think this totally breaks the promise of introducing the
> > > PARTITION_AWARE stuff in a backwards-compatible way.
> > > 
> > > So right now, yes we rely on reconciliation to finally mark the
> > > tasks as
> > > LOST and reschedule their replacements.
> > > 
> > > I think the only reason we haven't been more impacted by this at
> > > Twitter
> > > is our Mesos master is remarkably stable (compared to Aurora's
> > > daily
> > > failovers).
> > > 
> > > We have two paths forward here: push forward and embrace the new
> > > partition
> > > awareness features in Aurora and/or push back on the above change
> > > with the
> > > Mesos community and have a better story for non-partition aware
> > > APIs in the
> > > short term.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Meghdoot bhattacharya <
> > > meghdoo...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > We can reproduce it easily as the steps are
> > > > 1. Shut down leading mesos master
> > > > 2. Shutdown agent at same time
> > > > 3. Wait for 10 mins
> > > > 
> > > > What Renan and I saw in the logs were only agent lost and not
> > > > task lost
> > > > sent. While in regular health check expire scenario both task
> > > > lost and
> > > > agent lost were sent.
> > > > 
> > > > So yes this is very concerning.
> > > > 
> > > > Thx
> > > > 
> > > > > On Jul 14, 2017, at 10:28 AM, David McLaughlin  > > > > pache.org>
> > > > 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > It would be interesting to see the logs. I think that will
> > > > > tell you if
> > > > 
> > > > the
> > > > > Mesos master is:
> > > > > 
> > > > > a) Sending slaveLost
> > > > > b) Trying to send TASK_LOST
> > > > > 
> > > > > And then the Scheduler logs (and/or the metrics it exports)
> > > > > should tell
> > > > 
> > > > you
> > > > > whether those events were received. If this is reproducible,
> > > > > I'd
> > > > 
> > > > consider
> > > > > it a serious bug.
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Meghdoot bhattacharya <
> > > > > meghdoo...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > So in this situation why is not aurora replacing the tasks
> > > > > > and waiting
> > > > 
> > > > for
> > > > > > external recon to fix it.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > This is different when the 75 sec (5*15) health check of
> > > > > > slave times
> > > > 
> > > > out
> > > > > > (no master failover), aurora replaces it 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.17.x packages

[Stephan Erb]

This vote has passed.  Vote summary:

+1 votes: 3 binding
+0 votes: 0
-1 votes: 0

Artifacts are now available in the official Apache Aurora bintray
repos:
https://bintray.com/apache/aurora/ 


On Sun, 2017-02-12 at 17:53 +0100, Stephan Erb wrote:
> All,
> 
> I propose that we accept the following artifacts as the official deb
> and rpm packaging for
> Apache Aurora 0.17.x:
> 
> https://dl.bintray.com/stephanerb/aurora/
> 
> The Aurora deb and rpm packaging includes the following:
> 
> ---
> 
> The branch used to create the packaging is:
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=tr
> ee;hb=refs/heads/0.17.x
> 
> The packages are available at:
> https://dl.bintray.com/stephanerb/aurora/
> 
> The GPG keys used to sign the packages are available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/aurora/KEYS
> 
> Please download, verify, and test. Detailed test instructions are
> available here:
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=tr
> ee;f=test;hb=refs/heads/0.17.x
> 
> 
> The vote will close on Mi 15. Feb 15:16:00 CET 2017
> 
> [ ] +1 Release these as the deb and rpm packages for Apache Aurora
> 0.17.x
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release these artifacts because...

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.17.x packages

[Stephan Erb]

We are still one binding vote short for a release. Would be great if at
least of one additional PMC could take a look this week.

On Sun, 2017-02-12 at 17:53 +0100, Stephan Erb wrote:
> All,
> 
> I propose that we accept the following artifacts as the official deb
> and rpm packaging for
> Apache Aurora 0.17.x:
> 
> https://dl.bintray.com/stephanerb/aurora/
> 
> The Aurora deb and rpm packaging includes the following:
> 
> ---
> 
> The branch used to create the packaging is:
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=tr
> ee;hb=refs/heads/0.17.x
> 
> The packages are available at:
> https://dl.bintray.com/stephanerb/aurora/
> 
> The GPG keys used to sign the packages are available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/aurora/KEYS
> 
> Please download, verify, and test. Detailed test instructions are
> available here:
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=tr
> ee;f=test;hb=refs/heads/0.17.x
> 
> 
> The vote will close on Mi 15. Feb 15:16:00 CET 2017
> 
> [ ] +1 Release these as the deb and rpm packages for Apache Aurora
> 0.17.x
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release these artifacts because...

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.17.0 RC0

[Stephan Erb]

+1

Verified via release candidate script and deployment to a test cluster.

On Wed, 2017-02-01 at 11:22 +0100, Stephan Erb wrote:
> All,
> 
> I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the
> official
> Apache Aurora 0.17.0 release.
> 
> Aurora 0.17.0-rc0 includes the following:
> ---
> The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEASE-NOTES.
> md
> =rel/0.17.0-rc0
> 
> The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=CHANGELOG=r
> el
> /0.17.0-rc0
> 
> The tag used to create the release candidate is:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=shortlog;h=ref
> s/
> tags/rel/0.17.0-rc0
> 
> The release candidate is available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.17.0-rc0/apache-auror
> a-
> 0.17.0-rc0.tar.gz
> 
> The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.17.0-rc0/apache-auror
> a-
> 0.17.0-rc0.tar.gz.md5
> 
> The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.17.0-rc0/apache-auror
> a-
> 0.17.0-rc0.tar.gz.asc
> 
> The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS
> 
> Please download, verify, and test.
> 
> The vote will close on Sa 4. Feb 09:35:45 CET 2017
> 
> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.17.0
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.17.0 because...

[VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.17.0 RC0

[Stephan Erb]

All,

I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the
official
Apache Aurora 0.17.0 release.

Aurora 0.17.0-rc0 includes the following:
---
The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEASE-NOTES.md
=rel/0.17.0-rc0

The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=CHANGELOG=rel
/0.17.0-rc0

The tag used to create the release candidate is:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/
tags/rel/0.17.0-rc0

The release candidate is available at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.17.0-rc0/apache-aurora-
0.17.0-rc0.tar.gz

The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.17.0-rc0/apache-aurora-
0.17.0-rc0.tar.gz.md5

The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.17.0-rc0/apache-aurora-
0.17.0-rc0.tar.gz.asc

The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS

Please download, verify, and test.

The vote will close on Sa 4. Feb 09:35:45 CET 2017

[ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.17.0
[ ] +0
[ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.17.0 because...

Re: Preparations for 0.17.0

[Stephan Erb]

Hi everyone,

I plan to cut 0.17.0rc this week. Please have a look at the open
reviews so that we can wrap this up. 

https://reviews.apache.org/groups/aurora/

Best Regards,
Stephan

On Wed, 2017-01-25 at 00:10 +0100, Stephan Erb wrote:
> We are closing in on the number of open issues. https://issues.apache
> .o
> rg/jira/browse/AURORA-
> 1669?jql=fixVersion%20%3D%200.17.0%20AND%20project%20%3D%20AURORA%20A
> ND
> %20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC
> 
> 
> I would love to cut 0.17.0 in about a week or two, but I might need
> help on resolving the remaining bugs.
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2016-11-21 at 10:30 -0800, Zameer Manji wrote:
> > I am to blame for most of the milestone additions.
> > 
> > I will remove many of them later on today.
> > 
> > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:51 AM, Erb, Stephan <Stephan.Erb@blue-
> > yonder.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > In the last two weeks we have several additional tickets to the
> > > 0.17
> > > milestone without making much progress on shortening the list. In
> > > addition,
> > > we have several reviews on RB going stale due to lack of progress
> > > by both
> > > reviewers and contributors (myself included).
> > > 
> > > We should try not to lose focus here. Many features & fixes in a
> > > release
> > > are great. More regular releases are even better :-)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 03/11/16 23:01, "Renan DelValle" <rdelv...@binghamton.edu>
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > I'd really like to take care of
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1780 for 0.17.0,
> > > at least
> > > allow the scheduler to take less drastic measures.
> > > 
> > > If any one wants to submit any feedback as to how we should
> > > tackle
> > > this,
> > > I'm all ears.
> > > 
> > > -Renan
> > > 
> > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Joshua Cohen <jcohen@apache.o
> > > rg
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I added https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1782
> > > to
> > > 0.17.0
> > > > Hopefully I'll have time to look into that soon.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Zameer Manji
> > > <zma...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks for stepping up!
> > > > >
> > > > > I think picking up Mesos 1.1 is ideal for the release and
> > > we
> > > should block
> > > > > our release until it is out.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Erb, Stephan <
> > > > stephan@blue-yonder.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I’d like to volunteer as our next release manager and
> > > set
> > > the
> > > release
> > > > > > train for 0.17 into motion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Since 0.16 we have fixed several important bugs and
> > > should
> > > therefore
> > > > aim
> > > > > > for a release in the next 2-4 weeks, if possible. If
> > > everything
> > > goes
> > > > > > according to plan for the current Mesos release, we
> > > should be
> > > able to
> > > > > pick
> > > > > > up Mesos 1.1 as well.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please tag any blocker issues with `fixVersion 0.17` so
> > > that
> > > they show
> > > > up
> > > > > > on this dashboard: https://issues.apache.org/
> > > > > jira/browse/AURORA-1014?jql=
> > > > > >
> > > project%20%3D%20AURORA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.17.0%
> > > > > > 20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%
> > > > > > 20due%20ASC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > Stephan
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Zameer Manji
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Zameer Manji

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 RC2

[Stephan Erb]

+1 (binding)

Verified via ./build-support/release/verify-release-candidate 0.16.0-rc2


On Do, 2016-09-22 at 15:36 -0500, Joshua Cohen wrote:
> +0 Missing AURORA-1779 in CHANGELOG
> +1 Everything checks out via verify-release-candidate
> 
> Overall +1 (binding).
> 
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Joshua Cohen 
> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Note: I forgot to mark AURORA-1779 as fixed in 0.16.0 before
> > cutting this
> > RC, so that isn't reflected in the changelog. I don't consider that
> > a
> > blocker to release, but if others disagree I can cut rc3.
> > 
> > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Joshua Cohen 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > All,
> > > 
> > > I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the
> > > official
> > > Apache Aurora 0.16.0 release.
> > > 
> > > Aurora 0.16.0-rc2 includes the following:
> > > ---
> > > The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
> > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEA
> > > SE-NOTES.md=rel/0.16.0-rc2
> > > 
> > > The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
> > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=CHANG
> > > ELOG=rel/0.16.0-rc2
> > > 
> > > The tag used to create the release candidate is:
> > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=short
> > > log;h=refs/tags/rel/0.16.0-rc2
> > > 
> > > The release candidate is available at:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.16.0-rc2/apa
> > > che-aurora-0.16.0-rc2.tar.gz
> > > 
> > > The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.16.0-rc2/apa
> > > che-aurora-0.16.0-rc2.tar.gz.md5
> > > 
> > > The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.16.0-rc2/apa
> > > che-aurora-0.16.0-rc2.tar.gz.asc
> > > 
> > > The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS
> > > 
> > > Please download, verify, and test.
> > > 
> > > The vote will close on Sun Sep 25 14:11:09 CDT 2016
> > > 
> > > [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.16.0
> > > [ ] +0
> > > [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.16.0 because...
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 

[VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.14.0 packages

[Stephan Erb]

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.13.0 packages

[Stephan Erb]

Unfortunately, I managed to break the links using newlines. Please be
mindful when trying to follow them.


On Di, 2016-06-21 at 00:53 +0200, Stephan Erb wrote:
> All,
> 
> I propose that we accept the following artifacts as the official deb
> and rpm packaging for Apache Aurora 0.13.0.
> 
> https://dl.bintray.com/stephanerb/aurora/
> 
> The Aurora deb and rpm packaging includes the following:
> ---
> The CHANGELOGs are available at:
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=bl
> ob_plain;f=specs/debian/changelog;hb=refs/heads/0.13.x
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=bl
> ob_plain;f=specs/rpm/aurora.spec;hb=refs/heads/0.13.x
> 
> The branch used to create the packaging is:
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=tr
> ee;h=refs/heads/0.13.x
> 
> The packages are available at:
> https://dl.bintray.com/stephanerb/aurora/
> 
> The GPG keys used to sign the packages are available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/aurora/KEYS
> 
> Please download, verify, and test. Detailed test instructions are
> available here 
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=tr
> ee;f=test;hb=refs/heads/0.13.x.
> 
> The vote will close on Fr 24. Jun 00:01:00 CEST 2016
> 
> [ ] +1 Release these as the deb and rpm packages for Apache Aurora
> 0.13.0
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release these artifacts because...
> 
> I would like to get the voting started off with my own +1
> 
> Best Regards,
> Stephan

[VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.13.0 packages

[Stephan Erb]

All,

I propose that we accept the following artifacts as the official deb
and rpm packaging for Apache Aurora 0.13.0.

https://dl.bintray.com/stephanerb/aurora/

The Aurora deb and rpm packaging includes the following:
---
The CHANGELOGs are available at:
https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=blob
_plain;f=specs/debian/changelog;hb=refs/heads/0.13.x
https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=blob
_plain;f=specs/rpm/aurora.spec;hb=refs/heads/0.13.x

The branch used to create the packaging is:
https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=tree
;h=refs/heads/0.13.x

The packages are available at:
https://dl.bintray.com/stephanerb/aurora/

The GPG keys used to sign the packages are available at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/aurora/KEYS

Please download, verify, and test. Detailed test instructions are
available here 
https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=tree
;f=test;hb=refs/heads/0.13.x.

The vote will close on Fr 24. Jun 00:01:00 CEST 2016

[ ] +1 Release these as the deb and rpm packages for Apache Aurora
0.13.0
[ ] +0
[ ] -1 Do not release these artifacts because...

I would like to get the voting started off with my own +1

Best Regards,
Stephan

Re: [FEEDBACK] Transitioning Aurora leader election to Apache Curator (`-zk_use_curator`)

[Stephan Erb]

Thanks for doing the follow-up! I'll gradually enable the option on our
clusters sometime next week and let you know if we hit any issues.

Assuming we don't run into any roadblocks: How about changing the
default of `-zk_use_curator` from False to True for the next release?
Then we cane make significant progress with the deprecation while still
giving operators the possibility to do a  fall-back if necessary.

Cheers,
Stephan

On Di, 2016-06-14 at 17:43 -0600, John Sirois wrote:
> I'd like to move forward with https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/A
> URORA-1669 asap; ie: removing legacy (Twitter) commons zookeeper
> libraries used for Aurora leader election in favor of Apache Curator
> libraries. The change submitted in https://reviews.apache.org/r/46286
> / is now live in Aurora 0.14.0 and Apache Curator based service
> discovery can be enabled with the Aurora scheduler flag `-
> zk_use_curator`.  I'd like feedback from users who enable this
> option.  If you have a test cluster where you can enable `-
> zk_use_curator` and exercise leader failure and failover, I'd be
> grateful.  If you have moved to using this option in production with
> demonstrable improvements or even maintenance of status quo, I'd also
> be grateful for this news. If you've found regressions or new bugs,
> I'd love to know about those as well.
> 
> Thanks in advance to all those who find time to test this out on real
> systems!

[RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.14.0 RC0

[Stephan Erb]

All,
The vote to accept Apache Aurora 0.14.0 RC0
as the official Apache Aurora 0.14.0 release has passed.
+1 (Binding)
--
Jake Farrell
Maxim Khutornenko
Stephan Erb
+1 (Non-binding)
--
Martin Hrabovčin
There were no 0 or -1 votes. Thank you to all who helped make this release.
Aurora 0.14.0 includes the following:
---
The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=CHANGELOG=rel/0.14.0
The tag used to create the release with is rel/0.14.0:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=shortlog=refs/tags/rel/0.14.0
The release is available at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/aurora/0.14.0/apache-aurora-0.14.0.tar.gz
The MD5 checksum of the release can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/aurora/0.14.0/apache-aurora-0.14.0.tar.gz.md5
The signature of the release can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/aurora/0.14.0/apache-aurora-0.14.0.tar.gz.asc
The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/aurora/KEYS

On Fr, 2016-06-10 at 16:23 +0200, Stephan Erb wrote:
> All,
> 
> I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the
> official
> Apache Aurora 0.14.0 release.
> 
> Aurora 0.14.0-rc0 includes the following:
> ---
> The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEASE-
> NOTES.md
> =rel/0.14.0-rc0
> 
> The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
> https://git-wip-
> us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=CHANGELOG=rel
> /0.14.0-rc0
> 
> The tag used to create the release candidate is:
> https://git-wip-
> us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/
> tags/rel/0.14.0-rc0
> 
> The release candidate is available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-
> aurora-
> 0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz
> 
> The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-
> aurora-
> 0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz.md5
> 
> The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-
> aurora-
> 0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz.asc
> 
> The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS
> 
> Please download, verify, and test.
> The vote will close on Mo 13. Jun 16:00:00 CEST 2016
> 
> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.14.0
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.14.0 because...
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> Stephan

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.14.0 RC0

[Stephan Erb]

+1 from me, for completeness. Verified via:

./build-support/release/verify-release-candidate 0.14.0-rc0 


On Fr, 2016-06-10 at 16:28 +0200, Stephan Erb wrote:
> Re-post without line breaks in links:
> I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the
> official
> Apache Aurora 0.14.0 release.
> Aurora 0.14.0-rc0 includes the following:
> ---
> The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEASE-NOTES.
> md
> =rel/0.14.0-rc0
> The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=CHANGELOG=r
> el
> /0.14.0-rc0
> The tag used to create the release candidate is:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=shortlog;h=ref
> s/
> tags/rel/0.14.0-rc0
> The release candidate is available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-auror
> a-
> 0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz
> The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-auror
> a-
> 0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz.md5
> The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-auror
> a-
> 0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz.asc
> The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS
> Please download, verify, and test.
> The vote will close on Mo 13. Jun 16:00:00 CEST 2016
> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.14.0
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.14.0 because...
> On Fr, 2016-06-10 at 16:23 +0200, Stephan Erb wrote:
> > All,
> > 
> > I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the
> > official
> > Apache Aurora 0.14.0 release.
> > 
> > Aurora 0.14.0-rc0 includes the following:
> > ---
> > The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEASE-
> > NOTES.md
> > =rel/0.14.0-rc0
> > 
> > The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
> > https://git-wip-
> > us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=CHANGELOG=rel
> > /0.14.0-rc0
> > 
> > The tag used to create the release candidate is:
> > https://git-wip-
> > us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/
> > tags/rel/0.14.0-rc0
> > 
> > The release candidate is available at:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-
> > aurora-
> > 0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz
> > 
> > The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-
> > aurora-
> > 0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz.md5
> > 
> > The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-
> > aurora-
> > 0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz.asc
> > 
> > The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS
> > 
> > Please download, verify, and test.
> > The vote will close on Mo 13. Jun 16:00:00 CEST 2016
> > 
> > [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.14.0
> > [ ] +0
> > [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.14.0 because...
> > 
> > 
> > Best Regards,
> > Stephan

From Aurora 0.14 to 0.15

[Stephan Erb]

Hi everyone,

even though we are still in the process of getting 0.14 out of the
door, I'd like to propose that we aim for a short release cycle for
0.15.

This would entail:

* the update to Mesos 0.28.x
* no deprecation removals, so that it's easy to update from 0.14 to
0.15. 

Any objections? 

Best Regards,
Stephan

Re: [DRAFT][REPORT]: Apache Aurora

[Stephan Erb]

+1

On Fr, 2016-06-10 at 23:06 -0400, Jake Farrell wrote:
> Please take a second to review the board report below and provide any
> feedback (+1 or any desired modifications). I will submit this report
> pending any changes monday afternoon
> 
> -Jake
> 
> 
> 
> Apache Aurora is a stateless and fault tolerant service scheduler
> used to
> schedule jobs onto Apache Mesos such as long-running services, cron
> jobs,
> and one off tasks.
> 
> Project Status
> -
> The Apache Aurora community has continued to see growth from new
> users and
> contributors while working towards our upcoming 0.14.0 release. The
> upcoming
> release will contain a number of bug fixes, stability enhancements
> and new
> experimental features added such as Mesos GPU resource support,
> external
> webhook support, launching tasks using filesystem image with the new
> Apache
> Mesos unified containerizer.
> 
> Community
> ---
> Latest Additions:
> 
> * PMC addition: Stephan Erb, 2.3.2016
> 
> Issue backlog status since last report:
> 
> * Created:   62
> * Resolved:  80
> 
> Mailing list activity since last report:
> 
> * @dev329 messages
> * @user   103 messages
> 
> Releases
> ---
> Last release: Apache Aurora 0.13.0 released 4.13.2016
> Release candidate: Apache Aurora 0.14.0 release candidate vote is
> currently
> in progress

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.14.0 RC0

[Stephan Erb]

Re-post without line breaks in links:
I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the
official
Apache Aurora 0.14.0 release.
Aurora 0.14.0-rc0 includes the following:
---
The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEASE-NOTES.md
=rel/0.14.0-rc0
The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=CHANGELOG=rel
/0.14.0-rc0
The tag used to create the release candidate is:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/
tags/rel/0.14.0-rc0
The release candidate is available at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-aurora-
0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz
The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-aurora-
0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz.md5
The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-aurora-
0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz.asc
The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS
Please download, verify, and test.
The vote will close on Mo 13. Jun 16:00:00 CEST 2016
[ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.14.0
[ ] +0
[ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.14.0 because...
On Fr, 2016-06-10 at 16:23 +0200, Stephan Erb wrote:
> All,
> 
> I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the
> official
> Apache Aurora 0.14.0 release.
> 
> Aurora 0.14.0-rc0 includes the following:
> ---
> The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEASE-
> NOTES.md
> =rel/0.14.0-rc0
> 
> The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
> https://git-wip-
> us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=CHANGELOG=rel
> /0.14.0-rc0
> 
> The tag used to create the release candidate is:
> https://git-wip-
> us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/
> tags/rel/0.14.0-rc0
> 
> The release candidate is available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-
> aurora-
> 0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz
> 
> The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-
> aurora-
> 0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz.md5
> 
> The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-
> aurora-
> 0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz.asc
> 
> The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS
> 
> Please download, verify, and test.
> The vote will close on Mo 13. Jun 16:00:00 CEST 2016
> 
> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.14.0
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.14.0 because...
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> Stephan

[VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.14.0 RC0

[Stephan Erb]

All,

I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the
official
Apache Aurora 0.14.0 release.

Aurora 0.14.0-rc0 includes the following:
---
The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEASE-NOTES.md
=rel/0.14.0-rc0

The CHANGELOG for the release is available at:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=CHANGELOG=rel
/0.14.0-rc0

The tag used to create the release candidate is:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/
tags/rel/0.14.0-rc0

The release candidate is available at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-aurora-
0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz

The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-aurora-
0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz.md5

The signature of the release candidate can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/0.14.0-rc0/apache-aurora-
0.14.0-rc0.tar.gz.asc

The GPG key used to sign the release are available at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/aurora/KEYS

Please download, verify, and test.
The vote will close on Mo 13. Jun 16:00:00 CEST 2016

[ ] +1 Release this as Apache Aurora 0.14.0
[ ] +0
[ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Aurora 0.14.0 because...


Best Regards,
Stephan