Re: New architecture proposal

Hi Mingyu Thank you for the good questions. Before answering to your question, I will share the Lease in ETCD first. ETCD has a data model which is disappear after given time if there is no relevant keepalive on it, the Lease. So once you grant a new lease, you can put it with data in each

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Runtime Go (v1.13.0-incubating, rc2)

+1 Release verification checklist for reference: [x] Download links are valid. [x] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid. [x] DISCLAIMER is included. [x] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release. [x] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Runtime Go (v1.13.0-incubating, rc2)

Sigh ... that is a test for a python action and the executable file for an action is alway exec , inherited by the format of the docker runtime since I used the same. -- Michele Sciabarra mich...@sciabarra.com - Original message - From: Matt Sicker To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Composer (v0.11.0-incubating, rc2)

+1 Verified with rcverify and false positives verified manually. On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 at 04:21, Rob Allen wrote: > > Hi, > > I am +1 to release OpenWhisk Composer: > 6bc3405280176e55618853ee8eae284c6e603806 > > Verified with rcverify & spot checks. > > Release verification checklist for

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Runtime Go (v1.13.0-incubating, rc2)

Sorry, that looks like a false positive. Everything else passes verification by the script. On Sun, 7 Apr 2019 at 12:01, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Output from rcverify.sh: > > scanning for binaries... failed >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Runtimes (v1.13.0-incubating, rc1)

+1 for all but the Go runtime (but +1 for the Go rc2) On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 at 11:31, Rodric Rabbah wrote: > > Hi, > > This is a call to vote on releasing version 1.13.0-incubating release > candidate rc1 of the following 9 project modules with artifacts > built from the Git repositories and commit

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Runtime Go (v1.13.0-incubating, rc2)

Hi Matt. Thanks for the spending the time on verification. This is a false positive. If you inspect the file at the given path it should be evident that it’s a bash script and not a binary. There’s an open feature request to enhance the binary scanning in rcverify. -r > On Apr 7, 2019, at

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Runtime Go (v1.13.0-incubating, rc2)

+1 On Sun, 7 Apr 2019 at 12:03, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Sorry, that looks like a false positive. Everything else passes > verification by the script. > > On Sun, 7 Apr 2019 at 12:01, Matt Sicker wrote: > > > > Output from rcverify.sh: > > > > scanning for binaries... failed > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Runtime Go (v1.13.0-incubating, rc2)

Output from rcverify.sh: scanning for binaries... failed (/var/folders/kv/8jx_1xhx50l86vzzmzhltd2cgn/T/tmp.xNrnFc0z/incubator-openwhisk-runtime-go-1.13.0-incubating/openwhisk/_test/pysample/exec) On Sun, 7 Apr 2019 at 08:28, Rodric Rabbah wrote: > > Hi, > > This is a call to vote on

[VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Runtime Go (v1.13.0-incubating, rc2)

Hi, This is a call to vote on releasing version 1.13.0-incubating release candidate rc2 of the following project module with artifacts built from the Git repositories and commit IDs listed below. * OpenWhisk Runtime Go: ddd329946c1d061f256a274d6ccd23e527760e06

[slack-digest] [2019-04-06] #random

2019-04-06 11:17:12 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1554549432058400 2019-04-06 11:18:54 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: Anyone try this yet? https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1554549534059400 2019-04-06 11:23:04