Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Thanks ! Regards JB On 02/17/2018 09:34 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > Done. > > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 11:59 PM, Ahmet Altay wrote: >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 9:52 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Can someone from Python grand

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Done. On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 11:59 PM, Ahmet Altay wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 9:52 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Can someone from Python grand me permission to upload Python SDK 2.3.0 to >> PyPi ? > > > lukecwik, kennknowles,

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 9:52 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi, > > Can someone from Python grand me permission to upload Python SDK 2.3.0 to > PyPi ? > lukecwik, kennknowles, aljoscha, robertwb, davorbonaci are the package owners, any of them can do it. > > My user is

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Hi, Can someone from Python grand me permission to upload Python SDK 2.3.0 to PyPi ? My user is jbonofre. Thanks ! Regards JB On 02/16/2018 03:40 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Great !!! > > Thanks for the update, I will close the vote then. > > Regards > JB > > On 02/15/2018 11:45 PM,

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Thanks Ben! On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 10:06 AM Ben Sidhom wrote: > To get Flink 1.4.0 installed on Dataproc, I used my own init action. After > starting a detached flink session (e.g, HADOOP_CONF_DIR=/etc/hadoop/conf > /usr/lib/flink/bin/yarn-session.sh -n 4 -tm 4000 -d), I

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

To get Flink 1.4.0 installed on Dataproc, I used my own init action. After starting a detached flink session (e.g, HADOOP_CONF_DIR=/etc/hadoop/conf /usr/lib/flink/bin/yarn-session.sh -n 4 -tm 4000 -d), I pulled the Flink Job Manager address and port from the Application Master web UI. After that,

[RESULT][VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Hi all, I'm happy to announce that we have unanimously approved this release. There are 9 approving votes, 6 of which are binding: * Jean-Baptiste Onofré * Ismaël Mejia * Lukasz Cwik * Reuven Lax * Ahmet Altay * Robert Bradshaw There are no disapproving votes. Thanks everyone! Regards JB On

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Great !!! Thanks for the update, I will close the vote then. Regards JB On 02/15/2018 11:45 PM, Ben Sidhom wrote: > I just successfully ran the quickstart on Flink 1.4.0 on Dataproc. Should be > good to go. > > > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 9:21 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Thanks! Sounds like third RC is the winner :) On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 2:45 PM, Ben Sidhom wrote: > I just successfully ran the quickstart on Flink 1.4.0 on Dataproc. Should > be good to go. > > > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 9:21 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré >

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

I just successfully ran the quickstart on Flink 1.4.0 on Dataproc. Should be good to go. On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 9:21 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Luke said he tested Flink locally. So, we have to test on a Yarn cluster. > > Regards > JB > > On 02/15/2018 06:16 PM,

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Luke said he tested Flink locally. So, we have to test on a Yarn cluster. Regards JB On 02/15/2018 06:16 PM, Reuven Lax wrote: > I count enough votes :) So sounds like someone needs to verify Flink 1.4 > quickstart, and then we're ready? > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 5:38 PM, Robert Bradshaw

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

I count enough votes :) So sounds like someone needs to verify Flink 1.4 quickstart, and then we're ready? On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 5:38 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > +1 (binding) pending Flink verification. I have checked the signatures > and checksums of the artifacts, and

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

+1 (binding) pending Flink verification. I have checked the signatures and checksums of the artifacts, and that it agrees with commit 67b5e1bab25d284cdac2127b47f44acc8e83499e on github *except* for 76 places where -SNAPSHOT was removed. FWIW, http://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution now

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

+1 Thank you JB and thank you everyone for doing the validations. On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 5:24 PM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote: > Thanks Kenn. I retract my -1, but then someone must verify it with Flink > 1.4. I might give it a shot tomorrow (installing Flink 1.4 on Dataproc).

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Thanks Kenn. I retract my -1, but then someone must verify it with Flink 1.4. I might give it a shot tomorrow (installing Flink 1.4 on Dataproc). On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 4:53 PM Reuven Lax wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:42 AM, Alan Myrvold

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

+1 (binding) On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:42 AM, Alan Myrvold wrote: > +1 Validated java quickstarts for direct, dataflow, apex, flink, and spark. > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 9:21 AM, Lukasz Cwik wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> Validated several quickstarts

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

The FlinkRunner on the release-2.3.0 branch explicitly specifies Flink version 1.4.0. I think your initialization action is the culprit. On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 2:00 PM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote: > Tentative -1. > > I tried to validate quickstart on Flink on a Dataproc

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Tentative -1. I tried to validate quickstart on Flink on a Dataproc cluster and ran into a couple of issues. Here's the script I followed: $ curl https://raw.githubusercontent.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/dataproc-initialization-actions/master/flink/flink.sh -o flink.sh $ gsutil cp flink.sh

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

+1, Validated Python - Mobile game walkthrough, Python - Quickstart (Streaming Alpha). On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:42 AM, Alan Myrvold wrote: > +1 Validated java quickstarts for direct, dataflow, apex, flink, and spark. > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 9:21 AM, Lukasz Cwik

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

+1 Validated java quickstarts for direct, dataflow, apex, flink, and spark. On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 9:21 AM, Lukasz Cwik wrote: > +1 (binding) > Validated several quickstarts including the regression that I originally > reported with Spark. > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 5:34 AM,

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

+1 (binding) Validated several quickstarts including the regression that I originally reported with Spark. On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 5:34 AM, Ismaël Mejía wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Validated SHAs + tag vs source.zip file. > Run mvn clean install -Prelease OK > Validated that

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

+1 (binding) Validated SHAs + tag vs source.zip file. Run mvn clean install -Prelease OK Validated that the 3 regressions reported for RC1 were fixed. Run Nexmark on Direct/Flink runner on local mode, no regressions now. Installed python version on virtualenv and run local wordcount with success.

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

+1 (binding) Tested the Spark runner (with wordcount example and beam samples) Tested the performance of the direct runner I just updated the spreadsheet. Regards JB On 02/11/2018 06:33 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Please review and vote on the release candidate #3 for

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Gently reminder for the vote, we have only +1 (non binding) vote for now. Regards JB On 02/11/2018 06:33 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Please review and vote on the release candidate #3 for the version 2.3.0, as > follows: > > [ ] +1, Approve the release > [ ] -1, Do not

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Hi guys, as discussed, I created a staging repository extension containing the hadoop-input-format artifact: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1029/ Regards JB On 02/11/2018 06:33 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Please review and vote on the

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Hi Pawel, Just saw your messages on Slack. Let's try to identify the issue first. Regards JB On 02/12/2018 07:23 PM, Pawel Bartoszek wrote: > I wanted to verify that https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3186 fixes > my > original problem described in the ticket against 2.3.0 RC. However

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

I wanted to verify that https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3186 fixes my original problem described in the ticket against 2.3.0 RC. However I run into protobuf problems when deploying to flink 1.3.2. I posted exceptions on slack #general channel. I cannot deploy my job anymore. Cheers,

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

bq. is OK with staging repo extension ? +1 on using the above approach. Cheers

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

It's possible but not on the existing staging repo (as it's already closed). I can create an new staging repo, just containing the module. Regards JB On 02/12/2018 05:32 PM, Reuven Lax wrote: > If it's possible to just publish the module separately, that seems better > than RC4 > > On Mon,

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

you can't once you closed the staging repo Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn |

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

If it's possible to just publish the module separately, that seems better than RC4 On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:28 AM, Ismaël Mejía wrote: > Sorry the skip was an error while merging this module with the tests > during the move to Java 1.8. I will create a JIRA + PR, but wonder

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Sorry the skip was an error while merging this module with the tests during the move to Java 1.8. I will create a JIRA + PR, but wonder if we can somehow just publish this artifact to avoid creating a new RC+vote.. On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:22 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

If team agree, I can fix the deploy skip and create a staging repo extending the existing one just containing the IO. It's a mistake when we have cleanup the java8 modules. Should I create a RC4 or everyone is OK with staging repo extension ? Regards JB On 02/12/2018 05:10 PM, Neville Li

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

But that's it: deploy skip is set to the module, so it's expected. Regards JB On 02/12/2018 05:21 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > oops sorry, read too fast (thanks to not align artifactId and folder names > ;)): > deploy#skip=true in the module :) > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

It's in the IO parent module: https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/release-2.3.0/sdks/java/io/pom.xml#L55 Regards JB On 02/12/2018 05:19 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > it is not in the parent modules so completely skipped from the reactor > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

oops sorry, read too fast (thanks to not align artifactId and folder names ;)): deploy#skip=true in the module :) Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

it is not in the parent modules so completely skipped from the reactor Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

I don't see a beam-sdks-java-io-hadoop-input-format artifact in the staging repo, but the Maven module still exists: https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.3.0-RC3/sdks/java/io/hadoop-input-format Was it not published by mistake? We still have code that depends on this. On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Ok, checked custom jobs on spark and direct runners + -parameters is usable + some advanced sdk-core integration usages (outside runners) - not sure where it fits the spreadsheet though. Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Reminder: validation spreadsheet at https://s.apache.org/beam-2.3.0-release-validation . It'd be good to accompany votes by specifying in the spreadsheet what has been validated. On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 7:57 AM Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > +1 > > > Romain Manni-Bucau >

[VOTE] Release 2.3.0, release candidate #3

Hi everyone, Please review and vote on the release candidate #3 for the version 2.3.0, as follows: [ ] +1, Approve the release [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments) The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes: * JIRA release notes [1],