Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-23 Thread Eduard Tudenhoefner 
Thanks everyone who participated in the vote for the Release Iceberg 1.4.1
RC0.

The vote result is:

+1: 3 (binding), 5 (non-binding)
+0: 0 (binding), 0 (binding)
-1: 0 (binding), 1 (non-binding)

Therefore, the release candidate is passed.

On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 12:54 AM Ryan Blue  wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> Ran RAT checks, validated signature & checksum, built. I went over the
> commits and they look reasonable for a patch release.
>
> One nit is that the python CI checks are failing. That shouldn't block a
> Java release, but it would be nice to remove Python if we end up doing
> another 1.4.x release.
>
> Ryan
>
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 4:59 AM Hussein Awala  wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding) I tested the RC with spark 3.3 and hive catalog, and all
>> looks good.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:32 PM Steve Zhang
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> - validated checksum and signature
>>> - checked license docs & ran RAT checks
>>> - ran build and tests using JDK17 (problem with TestS3RestSigner
>>> and ADLSFileIOTest related but I think it’s setup related)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Steve Zhang
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 19, 2023, at 4:23 AM, Ajantha Bhat  wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> - validated checksum and signature
>>> - checked license docs & ran RAT checks
>>> - ran build and tests with JDK11
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ajantha
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 3:12 PM Xuanwo  wrote:
>>>
 > Xuanwo, if you want to learn more about voting, there is also an Apache
 page on it
 
 (that includes some suggestions :). But also feel welcome to ask on the
 devlist here.

 Thanks for pointing out the docs address. Just learnt that vote is [-1,
 1] instead of {-1, 0, 1}.

 On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 17:30, Fokko Driesprong wrote:

 Thanks Eduard for running this release!

 +1 (binding):

- Checked the sha/signature
- Ran our example notebooks against 1.4.1
 and
it looks well

 Xuanwo, if you want to learn more about voting, there is also an Apache
 page on it
 
 (that includes some suggestions :). But also feel welcome to ask on the
 devlist here.

 Kind regards,
 Fokko


 Op do 19 okt 2023 om 11:02 schreef Xuanwo :


 That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1
 (binding or non binding) into account.

 In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).


 Lesson learned. Next time, if the same situation occurs, I'll vote -0
 to make my statement more clear.

 On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 16:23, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

 By the way, at Apache, it's not really possible to veto or block a
 release: you need three binding votes, even if we have a fourth binding
 vote with -1, the release can pass.
 That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1
 (binding or non binding) into account.

 In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).

 You can see that I voted +1 because:
 - the release is the same as the previous ones
 - the issues have been identified and so we can fix it

 Regards
 JB

 On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:15 AM Xuanwo  wrote:


 You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s
 like this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted
 (including rat execution).

 So do you think it’s blocking ?


 Thanks for the clarification.

 I'm voting -1 due to the reasons mentioned, but it doesn't block this
 release (especially since it's non-binding). This release can proceed once
 it garners enough +1 votes. My -1 vote is simply to highlight areas we
 could improve in future releases.


 On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 13:11, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

 Hi

 You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s
 like this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted
 (including rat execution).

 So do you think it’s blocking ?

 Regards
 JB

 Le mer. 18 oct. 2023 à 16:27, Xuanwo  a écrit :


 -1 (non-binding)

 - checksum and signature is good

 - the following files not have license
   - .baseline/idea/intellij-java-palantir-style.xml
   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle.xml
   - gradle/libs.versions.toml
   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml

 - release contains binary files
   -
 core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
   -

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-22 Thread Ryan Blue 
+1 (binding)

Ran RAT checks, validated signature & checksum, built. I went over the
commits and they look reasonable for a patch release.

One nit is that the python CI checks are failing. That shouldn't block a
Java release, but it would be nice to remove Python if we end up doing
another 1.4.x release.

Ryan

On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 4:59 AM Hussein Awala  wrote:

> +1 (non-binding) I tested the RC with spark 3.3 and hive catalog, and all
> looks good.
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:32 PM Steve Zhang
>  wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> - validated checksum and signature
>> - checked license docs & ran RAT checks
>> - ran build and tests using JDK17 (problem with TestS3RestSigner
>> and ADLSFileIOTest related but I think it’s setup related)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Steve Zhang
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 19, 2023, at 4:23 AM, Ajantha Bhat  wrote:
>>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> - validated checksum and signature
>> - checked license docs & ran RAT checks
>> - ran build and tests with JDK11
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ajantha
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 3:12 PM Xuanwo  wrote:
>>
>>> > Xuanwo, if you want to learn more about voting, there is also an Apache
>>> page on it
>>> 
>>> (that includes some suggestions :). But also feel welcome to ask on the
>>> devlist here.
>>>
>>> Thanks for pointing out the docs address. Just learnt that vote is [-1,
>>> 1] instead of {-1, 0, 1}.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 17:30, Fokko Driesprong wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks Eduard for running this release!
>>>
>>> +1 (binding):
>>>
>>>- Checked the sha/signature
>>>- Ran our example notebooks against 1.4.1
>>> and it
>>>looks well
>>>
>>> Xuanwo, if you want to learn more about voting, there is also an Apache
>>> page on it
>>> 
>>> (that includes some suggestions :). But also feel welcome to ask on the
>>> devlist here.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Fokko
>>>
>>>
>>> Op do 19 okt 2023 om 11:02 schreef Xuanwo :
>>>
>>>
>>> That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1
>>> (binding or non binding) into account.
>>>
>>> In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).
>>>
>>>
>>> Lesson learned. Next time, if the same situation occurs, I'll vote -0 to
>>> make my statement more clear.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 16:23, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>>
>>> By the way, at Apache, it's not really possible to veto or block a
>>> release: you need three binding votes, even if we have a fourth binding
>>> vote with -1, the release can pass.
>>> That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1
>>> (binding or non binding) into account.
>>>
>>> In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).
>>>
>>> You can see that I voted +1 because:
>>> - the release is the same as the previous ones
>>> - the issues have been identified and so we can fix it
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:15 AM Xuanwo  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s
>>> like this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted
>>> (including rat execution).
>>>
>>> So do you think it’s blocking ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the clarification.
>>>
>>> I'm voting -1 due to the reasons mentioned, but it doesn't block this
>>> release (especially since it's non-binding). This release can proceed once
>>> it garners enough +1 votes. My -1 vote is simply to highlight areas we
>>> could improve in future releases.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 13:11, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s
>>> like this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted
>>> (including rat execution).
>>>
>>> So do you think it’s blocking ?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> Le mer. 18 oct. 2023 à 16:27, Xuanwo  a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>> -1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> - checksum and signature is good
>>>
>>> - the following files not have license
>>>   - .baseline/idea/intellij-java-palantir-style.xml
>>>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle.xml
>>>   - gradle/libs.versions.toml
>>>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>>>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>>>
>>> - release contains binary files
>>>   -
>>> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
>>>   -
>>> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-compressed-zstd.bin
>>>   -
>>> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, at 21:55, Eduard Tudenhoefner wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> * validated checksum and signature
>>> * checked license docs & ran RAT checks
>>> * ran build and tests with JDK8
>>> * ran into one test failure, which is

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-22 Thread Hussein Awala 
+1 (non-binding) I tested the RC with spark 3.3 and hive catalog, and all
looks good.

On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:32 PM Steve Zhang
 wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> - validated checksum and signature
> - checked license docs & ran RAT checks
> - ran build and tests using JDK17 (problem with TestS3RestSigner
> and ADLSFileIOTest related but I think it’s setup related)
>
> Thanks,
> Steve Zhang
>
>
>
> On Oct 19, 2023, at 4:23 AM, Ajantha Bhat  wrote:
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> - validated checksum and signature
> - checked license docs & ran RAT checks
> - ran build and tests with JDK11
>
> Thanks,
> Ajantha
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 3:12 PM Xuanwo  wrote:
>
>> > Xuanwo, if you want to learn more about voting, there is also an Apache
>> page on it
>> 
>> (that includes some suggestions :). But also feel welcome to ask on the
>> devlist here.
>>
>> Thanks for pointing out the docs address. Just learnt that vote is [-1,
>> 1] instead of {-1, 0, 1}.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 17:30, Fokko Driesprong wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Eduard for running this release!
>>
>> +1 (binding):
>>
>>- Checked the sha/signature
>>- Ran our example notebooks against 1.4.1
>> and it
>>looks well
>>
>> Xuanwo, if you want to learn more about voting, there is also an Apache
>> page on it
>> 
>> (that includes some suggestions :). But also feel welcome to ask on the
>> devlist here.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Fokko
>>
>>
>> Op do 19 okt 2023 om 11:02 schreef Xuanwo :
>>
>>
>> That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1 (binding
>> or non binding) into account.
>>
>> In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).
>>
>>
>> Lesson learned. Next time, if the same situation occurs, I'll vote -0 to
>> make my statement more clear.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 16:23, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>
>> By the way, at Apache, it's not really possible to veto or block a
>> release: you need three binding votes, even if we have a fourth binding
>> vote with -1, the release can pass.
>> That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1 (binding
>> or non binding) into account.
>>
>> In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).
>>
>> You can see that I voted +1 because:
>> - the release is the same as the previous ones
>> - the issues have been identified and so we can fix it
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:15 AM Xuanwo  wrote:
>>
>>
>> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like
>> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted
>> (including rat execution).
>>
>> So do you think it’s blocking ?
>>
>>
>> Thanks for the clarification.
>>
>> I'm voting -1 due to the reasons mentioned, but it doesn't block this
>> release (especially since it's non-binding). This release can proceed once
>> it garners enough +1 votes. My -1 vote is simply to highlight areas we
>> could improve in future releases.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 13:11, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like
>> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted
>> (including rat execution).
>>
>> So do you think it’s blocking ?
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> Le mer. 18 oct. 2023 à 16:27, Xuanwo  a écrit :
>>
>>
>> -1 (non-binding)
>>
>> - checksum and signature is good
>>
>> - the following files not have license
>>   - .baseline/idea/intellij-java-palantir-style.xml
>>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle.xml
>>   - gradle/libs.versions.toml
>>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>>
>> - release contains binary files
>>   -
>> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
>>   -
>> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-compressed-zstd.bin
>>   -
>> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, at 21:55, Eduard Tudenhoefner wrote:
>>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> * validated checksum and signature
>> * checked license docs & ran RAT checks
>> * ran build and tests with JDK8
>> * ran into one test failure, which is reported in
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/8824, but this shouldn't block
>> the release
>> * tested with Trino in https://github.com/trinodb/trino/pull/19434
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 3:15 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>> wrote:
>>
>> +1 (non binding)
>>
>> I checked:
>> * hashes and signatures are OK
>> * I did quick tests using spark 3.5
>>
>> I found the following issues that we should fix:
>> * the source distribution contains two binary files (used for
>> tests, empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
>> and sa

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-19 Thread Steve Zhang 
+1 (non-binding)

- validated checksum and signature
- checked license docs & ran RAT checks
- ran build and tests using JDK17 (problem with TestS3RestSigner and 
ADLSFileIOTest related but I think it’s setup related)

Thanks,
Steve Zhang



> On Oct 19, 2023, at 4:23 AM, Ajantha Bhat  wrote:
> 
> +1 (non-binding) 
> 
> - validated checksum and signature
> - checked license docs & ran RAT checks
> - ran build and tests with JDK11
> 
> Thanks, 
> Ajantha
> 
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 3:12 PM Xuanwo  > wrote:
>> > Xuanwo, if you want to learn more about voting, there is also an Apache 
>> > page on it 
>> > 
>> >  (that includes some suggestions :). But also feel welcome to ask on the 
>> > devlist here.
>> 
>> Thanks for pointing out the docs address. Just learnt that vote is [-1, 1] 
>> instead of {-1, 0, 1}.
>> 
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 17:30, Fokko Driesprong wrote:
>>> Thanks Eduard for running this release!
>>> 
>>> +1 (binding):
>>> Checked the sha/signature
>>> Ran our example notebooks against 1.4.1 
>>>  and it looks 
>>> well
>>> Xuanwo, if you want to learn more about voting, there is also an Apache 
>>> page on it 
>>> 
>>>  (that includes some suggestions :). But also feel welcome to ask on the 
>>> devlist here.
>>> 
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Fokko
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Op do 19 okt 2023 om 11:02 schreef Xuanwo >> >:
>>> 
 That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1 (binding 
 or non binding) into account.
 
 In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).
>>> 
>>> Lesson learned. Next time, if the same situation occurs, I'll vote -0 to 
>>> make my statement more clear.
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 16:23, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
 By the way, at Apache, it's not really possible to veto or block a 
 release: you need three binding votes, even if we have a fourth binding 
 vote with -1, the release can pass.
 That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1 (binding 
 or non binding) into account.
 
 In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).
 
 You can see that I voted +1 because:
 - the release is the same as the previous ones
 - the issues have been identified and so we can fix it
 
 Regards
 JB
 
 On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:15 AM Xuanwo >>> > wrote:
 
> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like 
> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted 
> (including rat execution). 
> 
> So do you think it’s blocking ?
 
 Thanks for the clarification.
 
 I'm voting -1 due to the reasons mentioned, but it doesn't block this 
 release (especially since it's non-binding). This release can proceed once 
 it garners enough +1 votes. My -1 vote is simply to highlight areas we 
 could improve in future releases.
 
 
 On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 13:11, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi
> 
> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like 
> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted 
> (including rat execution). 
> 
> So do you think it’s blocking ?
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> Le mer. 18 oct. 2023 à 16:27, Xuanwo  > a écrit :
> 
> -1 (non-binding)
> 
> - checksum and signature is good
> 
> - the following files not have license
>   - .baseline/idea/intellij-java-palantir-style.xml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle.xml
>   - gradle/libs.versions.toml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
> 
> - release contains binary files
>   - 
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
>   - 
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-compressed-zstd.bin
>   - 
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin
> 
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, at 21:55, Eduard Tudenhoefner wrote:
>> +1 (non-binding)
>> 
>> * validated checksum and signature
>> * checked license docs & ran RAT checks
>> * ran build and tests with JDK8
>> * ran into one test failure, which is reported in 
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/8824, but this shouldn't block 
>> the release
>> * tested with Trino in https://github.com/trinodb/trino/pull/19434
>> 
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 3:15 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > wrote:
>> +1 (non binding

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-19 Thread Ajantha Bhat 
+1 (non-binding)

- validated checksum and signature
- checked license docs & ran RAT checks
- ran build and tests with JDK11

Thanks,
Ajantha

On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 3:12 PM Xuanwo  wrote:

> > Xuanwo, if you want to learn more about voting, there is also an Apache
> page on it
> 
> (that includes some suggestions :). But also feel welcome to ask on the
> devlist here.
>
> Thanks for pointing out the docs address. Just learnt that vote is [-1, 1]
> instead of {-1, 0, 1}.
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 17:30, Fokko Driesprong wrote:
>
> Thanks Eduard for running this release!
>
> +1 (binding):
>
>- Checked the sha/signature
>- Ran our example notebooks against 1.4.1
> and it
>looks well
>
> Xuanwo, if you want to learn more about voting, there is also an Apache
> page on it
> 
> (that includes some suggestions :). But also feel welcome to ask on the
> devlist here.
>
> Kind regards,
> Fokko
>
>
> Op do 19 okt 2023 om 11:02 schreef Xuanwo :
>
>
> That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1 (binding
> or non binding) into account.
>
> In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).
>
>
> Lesson learned. Next time, if the same situation occurs, I'll vote -0 to
> make my statement more clear.
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 16:23, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>
> By the way, at Apache, it's not really possible to veto or block a
> release: you need three binding votes, even if we have a fourth binding
> vote with -1, the release can pass.
> That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1 (binding
> or non binding) into account.
>
> In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).
>
> You can see that I voted +1 because:
> - the release is the same as the previous ones
> - the issues have been identified and so we can fix it
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:15 AM Xuanwo  wrote:
>
>
> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like
> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted
> (including rat execution).
>
> So do you think it’s blocking ?
>
>
> Thanks for the clarification.
>
> I'm voting -1 due to the reasons mentioned, but it doesn't block this
> release (especially since it's non-binding). This release can proceed once
> it garners enough +1 votes. My -1 vote is simply to highlight areas we
> could improve in future releases.
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 13:11, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like
> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted
> (including rat execution).
>
> So do you think it’s blocking ?
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> Le mer. 18 oct. 2023 à 16:27, Xuanwo  a écrit :
>
>
> -1 (non-binding)
>
> - checksum and signature is good
>
> - the following files not have license
>   - .baseline/idea/intellij-java-palantir-style.xml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle.xml
>   - gradle/libs.versions.toml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>
> - release contains binary files
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-compressed-zstd.bin
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, at 21:55, Eduard Tudenhoefner wrote:
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> * validated checksum and signature
> * checked license docs & ran RAT checks
> * ran build and tests with JDK8
> * ran into one test failure, which is reported in
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/8824, but this shouldn't block
> the release
> * tested with Trino in https://github.com/trinodb/trino/pull/19434
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 3:15 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
>
> +1 (non binding)
>
> I checked:
> * hashes and signatures are OK
> * I did quick tests using spark 3.5
>
> I found the following issues that we should fix:
> * the source distribution contains two binary files (used for
> tests, empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
> and sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin). Binary files should not be
> included in the source distribution.
> * some files don't contain ASF header
>
> I will work to fix these issues, and also, I will propose to include rat
> to test our distribution.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:15 AM Eduard Tudenhoefner 
> wrote:
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I propose that we release the following RC as the official Apache Iceberg
> 1.4.1 release.
>
> The commit ID is 445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
> * This corresponds to the tag: apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
> * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commits

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-19 Thread Xuanwo 
> Xuanwo, if you want to learn more about voting, there is also an Apache page 
> on it 
> 
>  (that includes some suggestions :). But also feel welcome to ask on the 
> devlist here.

Thanks for pointing out the docs address. Just learnt that vote is [-1, 1] 
instead of {-1, 0, 1}.

On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 17:30, Fokko Driesprong wrote:
> Thanks Eduard for running this release!
> 
> +1 (binding):
>  • Checked the sha/signature
>  • Ran our example notebooks against 1.4.1 
>  and it looks 
> well
> Xuanwo, if you want to learn more about voting, there is also an Apache page 
> on it 
> 
>  (that includes some suggestions :). But also feel welcome to ask on the 
> devlist here.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Fokko
> 
> 
> Op do 19 okt 2023 om 11:02 schreef Xuanwo :
>> __
>>> That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1 (binding 
>>> or non binding) into account.
>>> 
>>> In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).
>> 
>> Lesson learned. Next time, if the same situation occurs, I'll vote -0 to 
>> make my statement more clear.
>> 
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 16:23, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>> By the way, at Apache, it's not really possible to veto or block a release: 
>>> you need three binding votes, even if we have a fourth binding vote with 
>>> -1, the release can pass.
>>> That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1 (binding 
>>> or non binding) into account.
>>> 
>>> In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).
>>> 
>>> You can see that I voted +1 because:
>>> - the release is the same as the previous ones
>>> - the issues have been identified and so we can fix it
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:15 AM Xuanwo  wrote:
 __
> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like 
> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted 
> (including rat execution). 
> 
> So do you think it’s blocking ?
 
 Thanks for the clarification.
 
 I'm voting -1 due to the reasons mentioned, but it doesn't block this 
 release (especially since it's non-binding). This release can proceed once 
 it garners enough +1 votes. My -1 vote is simply to highlight areas we 
 could improve in future releases.
 
 
 On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 13:11, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi
> 
> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like 
> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted 
> (including rat execution). 
> 
> So do you think it’s blocking ?
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> Le mer. 18 oct. 2023 à 16:27, Xuanwo  a écrit :
>> __
>> -1 (non-binding)
>> 
>> - checksum and signature is good
>> 
>> - the following files not have license
>>   - .baseline/idea/intellij-java-palantir-style.xml
>>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle.xml
>>   - gradle/libs.versions.toml
>>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>> 
>> - release contains binary files
>>   - 
>> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
>>   - 
>> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-compressed-zstd.bin
>>   - 
>> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin
>> 
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, at 21:55, Eduard Tudenhoefner wrote:
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>> 
>>> * validated checksum and signature
>>> * checked license docs & ran RAT checks
>>> * ran build and tests with JDK8
>>> * ran into one test failure, which is reported in 
>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/8824, but this shouldn't block 
>>> the release
>>> * tested with Trino in https://github.com/trinodb/trino/pull/19434
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 3:15 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>>>  wrote:
 +1 (non binding)
 
 I checked:
 * hashes and signatures are OK
 * I did quick tests using spark 3.5
 
 I found the following issues that we should fix:
 * the source distribution contains two binary files (used for tests, 
 empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin and 
 sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin). Binary files should not be 
 included in the source distribution.
 * some files don't contain ASF header
 
 I will work to fix these issues, and also, I will propose to include 
 rat to test our distribution.
 
 Regards
 JB
 
 
 On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:15

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-19 Thread Fokko Driesprong 
Thanks Eduard for running this release!

+1 (binding):

   - Checked the sha/signature
   - Ran our example notebooks against 1.4.1
    and it
   looks well

Xuanwo, if you want to learn more about voting, there is also an Apache
page on it

(that includes some suggestions :). But also feel welcome to ask on the
devlist here.

Kind regards,
Fokko


Op do 19 okt 2023 om 11:02 schreef Xuanwo :

> That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1 (binding
> or non binding) into account.
>
> In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).
>
>
> Lesson learned. Next time, if the same situation occurs, I'll vote -0 to
> make my statement more clear.
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 16:23, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>
> By the way, at Apache, it's not really possible to veto or block a
> release: you need three binding votes, even if we have a fourth binding
> vote with -1, the release can pass.
> That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1 (binding
> or non binding) into account.
>
> In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).
>
> You can see that I voted +1 because:
> - the release is the same as the previous ones
> - the issues have been identified and so we can fix it
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:15 AM Xuanwo  wrote:
>
>
> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like
> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted
> (including rat execution).
>
> So do you think it’s blocking ?
>
>
> Thanks for the clarification.
>
> I'm voting -1 due to the reasons mentioned, but it doesn't block this
> release (especially since it's non-binding). This release can proceed once
> it garners enough +1 votes. My -1 vote is simply to highlight areas we
> could improve in future releases.
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 13:11, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like
> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted
> (including rat execution).
>
> So do you think it’s blocking ?
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> Le mer. 18 oct. 2023 à 16:27, Xuanwo  a écrit :
>
>
> -1 (non-binding)
>
> - checksum and signature is good
>
> - the following files not have license
>   - .baseline/idea/intellij-java-palantir-style.xml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle.xml
>   - gradle/libs.versions.toml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>
> - release contains binary files
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-compressed-zstd.bin
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, at 21:55, Eduard Tudenhoefner wrote:
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> * validated checksum and signature
> * checked license docs & ran RAT checks
> * ran build and tests with JDK8
> * ran into one test failure, which is reported in
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/8824, but this shouldn't block
> the release
> * tested with Trino in https://github.com/trinodb/trino/pull/19434
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 3:15 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
>
> +1 (non binding)
>
> I checked:
> * hashes and signatures are OK
> * I did quick tests using spark 3.5
>
> I found the following issues that we should fix:
> * the source distribution contains two binary files (used for
> tests, empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
> and sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin). Binary files should not be
> included in the source distribution.
> * some files don't contain ASF header
>
> I will work to fix these issues, and also, I will propose to include rat
> to test our distribution.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:15 AM Eduard Tudenhoefner 
> wrote:
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I propose that we release the following RC as the official Apache Iceberg
> 1.4.1 release.
>
> The commit ID is 445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
> * This corresponds to the tag: apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
> * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commits/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
> *
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/tree/445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
>
> The release tarball, signature, and checksums are here:
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
>
> You can find the KEYS file here:
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/KEYS
>
> Convenience binary artifacts are staged on Nexus. The Maven repository URL
> is:
> *
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheiceberg-1147/
>
> Please download, verify, and test.
>
> Please vote in the next 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Iceberg 1.4.1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not relea

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-19 Thread Xuanwo 
> That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1 (binding or 
> non binding) into account.
> 
> In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).

Lesson learned. Next time, if the same situation occurs, I'll vote -0 to make 
my statement more clear.

On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 16:23, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> By the way, at Apache, it's not really possible to veto or block a release: 
> you need three binding votes, even if we have a fourth binding vote with -1, 
> the release can pass.
> That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1 (binding or 
> non binding) into account.
> 
> In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).
> 
> You can see that I voted +1 because:
> - the release is the same as the previous ones
> - the issues have been identified and so we can fix it
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:15 AM Xuanwo  wrote:
>> __
>>> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like 
>>> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted 
>>> (including rat execution). 
>>> 
>>> So do you think it’s blocking ?
>> 
>> Thanks for the clarification.
>> 
>> I'm voting -1 due to the reasons mentioned, but it doesn't block this 
>> release (especially since it's non-binding). This release can proceed once 
>> it garners enough +1 votes. My -1 vote is simply to highlight areas we could 
>> improve in future releases.
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 13:11, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like 
>>> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted 
>>> (including rat execution). 
>>> 
>>> So do you think it’s blocking ?
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>> 
>>> Le mer. 18 oct. 2023 à 16:27, Xuanwo  a écrit :
 __
 -1 (non-binding)
 
 - checksum and signature is good
 
 - the following files not have license
   - .baseline/idea/intellij-java-palantir-style.xml
   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle.xml
   - gradle/libs.versions.toml
   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
 
 - release contains binary files
   - 
 core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
   - 
 core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-compressed-zstd.bin
   - 
 core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin
 
 On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, at 21:55, Eduard Tudenhoefner wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
> 
> * validated checksum and signature
> * checked license docs & ran RAT checks
> * ran build and tests with JDK8
> * ran into one test failure, which is reported in 
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/8824, but this shouldn't block 
> the release
> * tested with Trino in https://github.com/trinodb/trino/pull/19434
> 
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 3:15 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré  
> wrote:
>> +1 (non binding)
>> 
>> I checked:
>> * hashes and signatures are OK
>> * I did quick tests using spark 3.5
>> 
>> I found the following issues that we should fix:
>> * the source distribution contains two binary files (used for tests, 
>> empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin and sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin). 
>> Binary files should not be included in the source distribution.
>> * some files don't contain ASF header
>> 
>> I will work to fix these issues, and also, I will propose to include rat 
>> to test our distribution.
>> 
>> Regards
>> JB
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:15 AM Eduard Tudenhoefner  
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Everyone,
>>> 
>>> I propose that we release the following RC as the official Apache 
>>> Iceberg 1.4.1 release.
>>> 
>>> The commit ID is 445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
>>> * This corresponds to the tag: apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
>>> * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commits/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
>>> * 
>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/tree/445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
>>> 
>>> The release tarball, signature, and checksums are here:
>>> * 
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
>>> 
>>> You can find the KEYS file here:
>>> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/KEYS
>>> 
>>> Convenience binary artifacts are staged on Nexus. The Maven repository 
>>> URL is:
>>> * 
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheiceberg-1147/
>>> 
>>> Please download, verify, and test.
>>> 
>>> Please vote in the next 72 hours.
>>> 
>>> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Iceberg 1.4.1
>>> [ ] +0
>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this because...
>>> 
>>> Only PMC members have

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-19 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
By the way, at Apache, it's not really possible to veto or block a release:
you need three binding votes, even if we have a fourth binding vote with
-1, the release can pass.
That said, from a community standpoint, it's good to take any -1 (binding
or non binding) into account.

In your case, I would have voted -0 (to avoid confusion).

You can see that I voted +1 because:
- the release is the same as the previous ones
- the issues have been identified and so we can fix it

Regards
JB

On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:15 AM Xuanwo  wrote:

> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like
> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted
> (including rat execution).
>
> So do you think it’s blocking ?
>
>
> Thanks for the clarification.
>
> I'm voting -1 due to the reasons mentioned, but it doesn't block this
> release (especially since it's non-binding). This release can proceed once
> it garners enough +1 votes. My -1 vote is simply to highlight areas we
> could improve in future releases.
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 13:11, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like
> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted
> (including rat execution).
>
> So do you think it’s blocking ?
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> Le mer. 18 oct. 2023 à 16:27, Xuanwo  a écrit :
>
>
> -1 (non-binding)
>
> - checksum and signature is good
>
> - the following files not have license
>   - .baseline/idea/intellij-java-palantir-style.xml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle.xml
>   - gradle/libs.versions.toml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>
> - release contains binary files
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-compressed-zstd.bin
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, at 21:55, Eduard Tudenhoefner wrote:
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> * validated checksum and signature
> * checked license docs & ran RAT checks
> * ran build and tests with JDK8
> * ran into one test failure, which is reported in
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/8824, but this shouldn't block
> the release
> * tested with Trino in https://github.com/trinodb/trino/pull/19434
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 3:15 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
>
> +1 (non binding)
>
> I checked:
> * hashes and signatures are OK
> * I did quick tests using spark 3.5
>
> I found the following issues that we should fix:
> * the source distribution contains two binary files (used for
> tests, empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
> and sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin). Binary files should not be
> included in the source distribution.
> * some files don't contain ASF header
>
> I will work to fix these issues, and also, I will propose to include rat
> to test our distribution.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:15 AM Eduard Tudenhoefner 
> wrote:
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I propose that we release the following RC as the official Apache Iceberg
> 1.4.1 release.
>
> The commit ID is 445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
> * This corresponds to the tag: apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
> * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commits/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
> *
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/tree/445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
>
> The release tarball, signature, and checksums are here:
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
>
> You can find the KEYS file here:
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/KEYS
>
> Convenience binary artifacts are staged on Nexus. The Maven repository URL
> is:
> *
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheiceberg-1147/
>
> Please download, verify, and test.
>
> Please vote in the next 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Iceberg 1.4.1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release this because...
>
> Only PMC members have binding votes, but other community members are
> encouraged to cast
> non-binding votes. This vote will pass if there are 3 binding +1 votes and
> more binding
> +1 votes than -1 votes.
>
>
>
> Xuanwo
>
>
> Xuanwo
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-19 Thread Xuanwo 
> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like 
> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted (including 
> rat execution). 
> 
> So do you think it’s blocking ?

Thanks for the clarification.

I'm voting -1 due to the reasons mentioned, but it doesn't block this release 
(especially since it's non-binding). This release can proceed once it garners 
enough +1 votes. My -1 vote is simply to highlight areas we could improve in 
future releases.


On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, at 13:11, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi
> 
> You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like 
> this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted (including 
> rat execution). 
> 
> So do you think it’s blocking ?
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> Le mer. 18 oct. 2023 à 16:27, Xuanwo  a écrit :
>> __
>> -1 (non-binding)
>> 
>> - checksum and signature is good
>> 
>> - the following files not have license
>>   - .baseline/idea/intellij-java-palantir-style.xml
>>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle.xml
>>   - gradle/libs.versions.toml
>>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>> 
>> - release contains binary files
>>   - 
>> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
>>   - 
>> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-compressed-zstd.bin
>>   - 
>> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin
>> 
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, at 21:55, Eduard Tudenhoefner wrote:
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>> 
>>> * validated checksum and signature
>>> * checked license docs & ran RAT checks
>>> * ran build and tests with JDK8
>>> * ran into one test failure, which is reported in 
>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/8824, but this shouldn't block the 
>>> release
>>> * tested with Trino in https://github.com/trinodb/trino/pull/19434
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 3:15 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré  
>>> wrote:
 +1 (non binding)
 
 I checked:
 * hashes and signatures are OK
 * I did quick tests using spark 3.5
 
 I found the following issues that we should fix:
 * the source distribution contains two binary files (used for tests, 
 empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin and sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin). 
 Binary files should not be included in the source distribution.
 * some files don't contain ASF header
 
 I will work to fix these issues, and also, I will propose to include rat 
 to test our distribution.
 
 Regards
 JB
 
 
 On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:15 AM Eduard Tudenhoefner  
 wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> I propose that we release the following RC as the official Apache Iceberg 
> 1.4.1 release.
> 
> The commit ID is 445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
> * This corresponds to the tag: apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
> * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commits/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
> * 
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/tree/445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
> 
> The release tarball, signature, and checksums are here:
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
> 
> You can find the KEYS file here:
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/KEYS
> 
> Convenience binary artifacts are staged on Nexus. The Maven repository 
> URL is:
> * 
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheiceberg-1147/
> 
> Please download, verify, and test.
> 
> Please vote in the next 72 hours.
> 
> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Iceberg 1.4.1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release this because...
> 
> Only PMC members have binding votes, but other community members are 
> encouraged to cast
> non-binding votes. This vote will pass if there are 3 binding +1 votes 
> and more binding
> +1 votes than -1 votes.
> 
> 
>> 
>> Xuanwo
>> 

Xuanwo

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-18 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
Hi

You can see it’s what I mentioned in my vote email. However, as it’s like
this for a while, I voted +1 and I have PRs ready to be submitted
(including rat execution).

So do you think it’s blocking ?

Regards
JB

Le mer. 18 oct. 2023 à 16:27, Xuanwo  a écrit :

> -1 (non-binding)
>
> - checksum and signature is good
>
> - the following files not have license
>   - .baseline/idea/intellij-java-palantir-style.xml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle.xml
>   - gradle/libs.versions.toml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>
> - release contains binary files
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-compressed-zstd.bin
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, at 21:55, Eduard Tudenhoefner wrote:
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> * validated checksum and signature
> * checked license docs & ran RAT checks
> * ran build and tests with JDK8
> * ran into one test failure, which is reported in
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/8824, but this shouldn't block
> the release
> * tested with Trino in https://github.com/trinodb/trino/pull/19434
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 3:15 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
>
> +1 (non binding)
>
> I checked:
> * hashes and signatures are OK
> * I did quick tests using spark 3.5
>
> I found the following issues that we should fix:
> * the source distribution contains two binary files (used for
> tests, empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
> and sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin). Binary files should not be
> included in the source distribution.
> * some files don't contain ASF header
>
> I will work to fix these issues, and also, I will propose to include rat
> to test our distribution.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:15 AM Eduard Tudenhoefner 
> wrote:
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I propose that we release the following RC as the official Apache Iceberg
> 1.4.1 release.
>
> The commit ID is 445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
> * This corresponds to the tag: apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
> * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commits/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
> *
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/tree/445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
>
> The release tarball, signature, and checksums are here:
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
>
> You can find the KEYS file here:
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/KEYS
>
> Convenience binary artifacts are staged on Nexus. The Maven repository URL
> is:
> *
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheiceberg-1147/
>
> Please download, verify, and test.
>
> Please vote in the next 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Iceberg 1.4.1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release this because...
>
> Only PMC members have binding votes, but other community members are
> encouraged to cast
> non-binding votes. This vote will pass if there are 3 binding +1 votes and
> more binding
> +1 votes than -1 votes.
>
>
>
> Xuanwo
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-18 Thread Daniel Weeks 
+1 (binding)

Verified sigs/sums/license/build/test (Java 11)

-Dan

On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 7:30 AM Xuanwo  wrote:

> -1 (non-binding)
>
> - checksum and signature is good
>
> - the following files not have license
>   - .baseline/idea/intellij-java-palantir-style.xml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle.xml
>   - gradle/libs.versions.toml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>   - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
>
> - release contains binary files
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-compressed-zstd.bin
>   -
> core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, at 21:55, Eduard Tudenhoefner wrote:
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> * validated checksum and signature
> * checked license docs & ran RAT checks
> * ran build and tests with JDK8
> * ran into one test failure, which is reported in
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/8824, but this shouldn't block
> the release
> * tested with Trino in https://github.com/trinodb/trino/pull/19434
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 3:15 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
>
> +1 (non binding)
>
> I checked:
> * hashes and signatures are OK
> * I did quick tests using spark 3.5
>
> I found the following issues that we should fix:
> * the source distribution contains two binary files (used for
> tests, empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
> and sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin). Binary files should not be
> included in the source distribution.
> * some files don't contain ASF header
>
> I will work to fix these issues, and also, I will propose to include rat
> to test our distribution.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:15 AM Eduard Tudenhoefner 
> wrote:
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I propose that we release the following RC as the official Apache Iceberg
> 1.4.1 release.
>
> The commit ID is 445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
> * This corresponds to the tag: apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
> * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commits/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
> *
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/tree/445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
>
> The release tarball, signature, and checksums are here:
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
>
> You can find the KEYS file here:
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/KEYS
>
> Convenience binary artifacts are staged on Nexus. The Maven repository URL
> is:
> *
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheiceberg-1147/
>
> Please download, verify, and test.
>
> Please vote in the next 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Iceberg 1.4.1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release this because...
>
> Only PMC members have binding votes, but other community members are
> encouraged to cast
> non-binding votes. This vote will pass if there are 3 binding +1 votes and
> more binding
> +1 votes than -1 votes.
>
>
>
> Xuanwo
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-18 Thread Xuanwo 
-1 (non-binding)

- checksum and signature is good

- the following files not have license
  - .baseline/idea/intellij-java-palantir-style.xml
  - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle.xml
  - gradle/libs.versions.toml
  - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml
  - .baseline/checkstyle/checkstyle-suppressions.xml

- release contains binary files
  - 
core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
  - 
core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-compressed-zstd.bin
  - 
core/src/test/resources/org/apache/iceberg/puffin/v1/sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin

On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, at 21:55, Eduard Tudenhoefner wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
> 
> * validated checksum and signature
> * checked license docs & ran RAT checks
> * ran build and tests with JDK8
> * ran into one test failure, which is reported in 
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/8824, but this shouldn't block the 
> release
> * tested with Trino in https://github.com/trinodb/trino/pull/19434
> 
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 3:15 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré  
> wrote:
>> +1 (non binding)
>> 
>> I checked:
>> * hashes and signatures are OK
>> * I did quick tests using spark 3.5
>> 
>> I found the following issues that we should fix:
>> * the source distribution contains two binary files (used for tests, 
>> empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin and sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin). 
>> Binary files should not be included in the source distribution.
>> * some files don't contain ASF header
>> 
>> I will work to fix these issues, and also, I will propose to include rat to 
>> test our distribution.
>> 
>> Regards
>> JB
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:15 AM Eduard Tudenhoefner  
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Everyone,
>>> 
>>> I propose that we release the following RC as the official Apache Iceberg 
>>> 1.4.1 release.
>>> 
>>> The commit ID is 445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
>>> * This corresponds to the tag: apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
>>> * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commits/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
>>> * 
>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/tree/445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
>>> 
>>> The release tarball, signature, and checksums are here:
>>> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
>>> 
>>> You can find the KEYS file here:
>>> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/KEYS
>>> 
>>> Convenience binary artifacts are staged on Nexus. The Maven repository URL 
>>> is:
>>> * https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheiceberg-1147/
>>> 
>>> Please download, verify, and test.
>>> 
>>> Please vote in the next 72 hours.
>>> 
>>> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Iceberg 1.4.1
>>> [ ] +0
>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this because...
>>> 
>>> Only PMC members have binding votes, but other community members are 
>>> encouraged to cast
>>> non-binding votes. This vote will pass if there are 3 binding +1 votes and 
>>> more binding
>>> +1 votes than -1 votes.
>>> 
>>> 

Xuanwo

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-18 Thread Eduard Tudenhoefner 
+1 (non-binding)

* validated checksum and signature
* checked license docs & ran RAT checks
* ran build and tests with JDK8
* ran into one test failure, which is reported in
https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/8824, but this shouldn't block the
release
* tested with Trino in https://github.com/trinodb/trino/pull/19434

On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 3:15 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> +1 (non binding)
>
> I checked:
> * hashes and signatures are OK
> * I did quick tests using spark 3.5
>
> I found the following issues that we should fix:
> * the source distribution contains two binary files (used for
> tests, empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
> and sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin). Binary files should not be
> included in the source distribution.
> * some files don't contain ASF header
>
> I will work to fix these issues, and also, I will propose to include rat
> to test our distribution.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:15 AM Eduard Tudenhoefner 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> I propose that we release the following RC as the official Apache Iceberg
>> 1.4.1 release.
>>
>> The commit ID is 445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
>> * This corresponds to the tag: apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
>> * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commits/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
>> *
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/tree/445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
>>
>> The release tarball, signature, and checksums are here:
>> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
>>
>> You can find the KEYS file here:
>> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/KEYS
>>
>> Convenience binary artifacts are staged on Nexus. The Maven repository
>> URL is:
>> *
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheiceberg-1147/
>>
>> Please download, verify, and test.
>>
>> Please vote in the next 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Iceberg 1.4.1
>> [ ] +0
>> [ ] -1 Do not release this because...
>>
>> Only PMC members have binding votes, but other community members are
>> encouraged to cast
>> non-binding votes. This vote will pass if there are 3 binding +1 votes
>> and more binding
>> +1 votes than -1 votes.
>>
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.4.1 RC0

2023-10-18 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
+1 (non binding)

I checked:
* hashes and signatures are OK
* I did quick tests using spark 3.5

I found the following issues that we should fix:
* the source distribution contains two binary files (used for
tests, empty-puffin-uncompressed.bin
and sample-metric-data-uncompressed.bin). Binary files should not be
included in the source distribution.
* some files don't contain ASF header

I will work to fix these issues, and also, I will propose to include rat to
test our distribution.

Regards
JB


On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:15 AM Eduard Tudenhoefner 
wrote:

> Hi Everyone,
>
> I propose that we release the following RC as the official Apache Iceberg
> 1.4.1 release.
>
> The commit ID is 445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
> * This corresponds to the tag: apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
> * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commits/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
> *
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/tree/445664fb8d82950215872cbfec91e37c5fa0920f
>
> The release tarball, signature, and checksums are here:
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/apache-iceberg-1.4.1-rc0
>
> You can find the KEYS file here:
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/KEYS
>
> Convenience binary artifacts are staged on Nexus. The Maven repository URL
> is:
> *
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheiceberg-1147/
>
> Please download, verify, and test.
>
> Please vote in the next 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Iceberg 1.4.1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release this because...
>
> Only PMC members have binding votes, but other community members are
> encouraged to cast
> non-binding votes. This vote will pass if there are 3 binding +1 votes and
> more binding
> +1 votes than -1 votes.
>
>