Just a quick clarification! The "push --force" that I mentioned was *only*
in the PR branch *before* merging! In this case, there was never a branch
on the apache/avro repo that had its history changed by a `--force`.
I tend to be a bit more lenient on working branches on my own repos,
especiall
Hello!
I merged the python PR, which had the majority of the commits we wanted for
1.9.2. My apologies if the "git push --force" was a bit of a pain to
follow -- I was trying to keep the git history readable.
The next JIRA and PR I mentioned can be found here:
https://github.com/apache/avro/pull
OK! Here's where we're at:
I did some clean-up on the history of the python PR (
https://github.com/apache/avro/pull/777). Of course, there was a last
minute hiccup with a rebase, so there's still one `fixup!` commit in the
history for now.
I created another JIRA and PR for additional cherry-pi
Thanks for all the work Ryan.
We just create an RC tag on the 1.9 branch, and build and publish the
artifact to the mailing list. Today I'll check if we want to cherry-pick
any minor dependency updates for Java.
Cheers, Fokko
Op wo 22 jan. 2020 om 18:28 schreef Ryan Skraba :
> Hello! Slow but
Thanks Ryan!
On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 2:36 AM Ryan Skraba wrote:
> Hello! It looks like this has already been done -- the commit was already
> cherrry-picked into branch-1.9 and should appear in release 1.9.2 (see
> https://github.com/apache/avro/blob/branch-1.9/lang/java/pom.xml#L42).
>
> A few
Hello! Slow but certain -- I pushed the rest of the identified commits for
python, updated the tickets and am doing some confirmation!
Notably, there was a nice cleanup/refactor of the Dockerfile that was
cherry-picked. I kept some but not all of the tool bumps that it included
(as a separate co
Hello! It looks like this has already been done -- the commit was already
cherrry-picked into branch-1.9 and should appear in release 1.9.2 (see
https://github.com/apache/avro/blob/branch-1.9/lang/java/pom.xml#L42).
A few months ago, there was some question about whether the jackson upgrade
was ac
Hi,
Here's the upgrade to Jackson 2.10.0 that I was hoping to get cherry-picked
to 1.9.2:
https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/c50974094d95d1dbd9c8b3bb6c4133a43b44fd03
Thanks,
Robert
On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 9:52 AM Robert Yokota wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Any chance we can get the following upgrade to
Ryan, thanks for agreeing to take a shot. I created a tracking ticket
for the effort: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2697
I attached a text file to that ticket with the PRs against master that
I think we want in 1.9. The ones checked off are what I already
managed to do against my own
I gave you permissions on pypi and rubygems.
Doug
On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 6:52 AM Ryan Skraba wrote:
> Hello!
>
> For python I'd be happy to go through the build changes, especially if
> you can list (or create a branch) for the lang/py cherry-picks that
> are already known to be necessary!
>
>
Hi,
Any chance we can get the following upgrade to Jackson 2.10.0
cherry-picked to 1.9.2?
Thanks,
Robert
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 9:48 AM Driesprong, Fokko wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm working on bumping Apache Avro on the Apache Iceberg project:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-iceberg/pull
Hello!
For python I'd be happy to go through the build changes, especially if
you can list (or create a branch) for the lang/py cherry-picks that
are already known to be necessary!
I've been going through the list of ALL the commits in master that
have no equivalent in release-1.9 using:
git co
I may have bitten off more than I can chew here. I've been unable to cherry
pick all the changes from master into 1.9. The python changes themselves
are not the problem-- I think the problem is that there have been several
changes to Dockerfile and the build system, some related to python and some
The only direct API changes were to deprecate capital-P parse in lang/py3.
The syntax is still supported, but will cause a warning.
There are some implied API changes insofar as we dropped support for
python<2.7 as well, removing some polyfills and syntax that supported old
pythons as well.
Unles
Hi Mike,
Do you know if this introduces any breaking changes to the API? Since this
is a minor update, we should keep the API compatible.
Cheers, Fokko
Op za 11 jan. 2020 om 13:51 schreef Michael A. Smith :
> So far none of my python2/3 changes have been targeting 1.9. They're
> currently just
So far none of my python2/3 changes have been targeting 1.9. They're
currently just in master. It would be great if someone could cherry pick
them. I'm away this weekend, but happy to help via phone or more directly
next week if it turns complex.
Best regards,
Mike
On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 07:39 D
Thanks for the review Ryan, appreciate it.
I'm happy to help you with the release, if you could pick that up, that
would be great. Before starting the release process, I'd like to check if
there are commits that are targeted for 1.10 but can be cherry-picked back
to 1.9.2.
For doing the release,
Hello! I read and reviewed the PR -- it looks OK to me, is there
something more to do to the current fix?
I'd be happy to do or help out with the release ... I suspect I might
need a bit of hand-holding for this first time, but the doc looks
pretty complete. Alternatively, if it's easier, I coul
18 matches
Mail list logo
