[RESULT] [VOTE] First hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 Release Candidate is available

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

[RESULT] [VOTE] First hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 Release Candidate is available

stack-3
With 4 binding votes and 1 non-binding, vote passes. Let me push out the
alpha.
Thanks to all who voted.
St.Ack


On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Great. Thanks Sean. In-line...
>
> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:35 PM, Sean Busbey <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> details below, a few things to clean up for later alpha/betas.
>>
>> * checksums are all good
>> * signatures are made with two different keys. should clean up by next
>> alpha.
>>
>> src / bin artifacts are signed with 8ACC93D2, as you mentioned in the
>> VOTE. However, this key is not in our project's KEYS file.
>>
>>
> Yes. Will fix.
>
>
>> maven staged repository are signed with 30CD0996, which is in our KEYS
>> file so those check out fine.
>>
>> * the tag 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0 does point to
>> c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc, which matches the source
>> artifact after accounting HBASE-13088
>>
>> The tag isn't signed; would be good to make sure we do tag signing in
>> betas so that it's ready to go come GA time.
>>
>>
> Next time through, I'll update our 'How to RC' doc and will add above.
>
>
>
>> (side note, it would be good to get a decision on HBASE-13088 for the
>> beta releases. been over 2 years)
>>
>> * the source tarball creates a binary assembly that looks as close to
>> the posted binary artifact as I've seen branch-1 do.
>>
>> idle interest, but our binary convenience artifact has jumped from
>> ~100MiB in branch-1 release to ~160MiB. If anyone has time to dig in
>> on why, probably worth checking. (e.g. the docs directory is ~585 MiB
>> when untared.)
>>
>>
> Yes. Its obnoxious (HBASE-18208).
>
>
>> * shaded artifact binaries are a reasonable number of MiB in size
>> (incorrect build flags will result in ~empty jars)
>>
>> * LICENSE/NOTICE spot check looks okay.
>>
>> we have a ton of places where we have velocity variables instead of
>> copyright years, but IIRC that's a problem on branch-1 right now too.
>>
>> * CHANGES file hasn't been updated correctly
>>
>> currently has details for 0.93.
>>
>>
> Will fix next time through.
>
> Thanks Sean,
> S
>
>
>
>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Andrew Purtell <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>> > +1
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> The first release candidate for HBase 2.0.0-alpha-1 is up at:
>> >>
>> >>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1RC0/
>> >>
>> >> Maven artifacts are available from a staging directory here:
>> >>
>> >>  https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>> hbase-1169
>> >>
>> >> All was signed w/ my key 8ACC93D2
>> >> <http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9816C7FC8ACC93D2>
>> >>
>> >> I tagged the RC as 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0
>> >> (c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc).
>> >>
>> >> hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 will be our first 2.0.0 release. It is a rough cut
>> >> ('alpha') not-for-production preview of what hbase-2.0.0 will look
>> like. It
>> >> is what we used to call a 'Developer' release[1] meant mostly for devs
>> and
>> >> downstreamers to test drive and flag us early if we there are issues
>> we’ve
>> >> missed ahead of our rolling a production-worthy release.
>> >>
>> >> hbase-2.0.0 includes a fleet of new features that include a new
>> assignment
>> >> manager, means for keeping read and write path off-heap, in-memory
>> >> compactions, and more. I have been keeping a running doc on the state
>> of
>> >> 2.0.0 here [2]. There is much to do still (see aforementioned doc).
>> >>
>> >> The list of features addressed in 2.0.0 so far can be found here [4].
>> There
>> >> are about 2500. The list of ~500 fixes in 2.0.0 exclusively can be
>> found
>> >> here [3].
>> >>
>> >> Please take it for a spin and vote on whether it ok to put out as our
>> first
>> >> alpha (bar is low for an 'alpha'). Let the VOTE be open for 24 hours.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> St.Ack
>> >>
>> >> 1. http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning.pre10
>> >> 2.
>> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_
>> >> ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#heading=h.v21r9nz8g01j
>> >> 3.
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17852?jql=
>> >> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.
>> >> 0.0%20and%20fixVersion%20not%20in%20(1.0.0%2C%201.0.1%2C%
>> >> 201.0.2%2C%201.0.3%2C%201.0.4%2C%201.0.5%2C%201.0.6%2C%201.
>> >> 1.0%2C%201.1.1%2C%201.1.2%2C%201.1.3%2C%201.1.4%2C%201.1.5%
>> >> 2C%201.1.6%2C%201.1.7%2C%201.1.8%2C%201.1.9%2C%201.1.10%2C%
>> >> 201.2.0%2C%201.2.1%2C%201.2.2%2C%201.2.3%2C%201.2.4%2C%201.
>> >> 2.5%2C%201.2.6%2C%201.3.0%2C%201.3.1%2C%201.4.0)%20and%20%
>> >> 20(status%20%3D%20Open%20or%20status%20%3D%20%22Patch%20Available%22)
>> >> 4.
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18191?jql=
>> >> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20(%20fixVersion%20%3D%
>> >> 202.0.0)%20and%20(status%20%3D%20Resolved)
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best regards,
>> >
>> >    - Andy
>> >
>> > If you are given a choice, you believe you have acted freely. - Raymond
>> > Teller (via Peter Watts)
>>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] First hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 Release Candidate is available

Mike Drob-2
Hi Stack,

Can you mark jira version 2.0.0-alpha-1 as released?

Thanks,
Mike

On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 10:55 PM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:

> With 4 binding votes and 1 non-binding, vote passes. Let me push out the
> alpha.
> Thanks to all who voted.
> St.Ack
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Great. Thanks Sean. In-line...
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:35 PM, Sean Busbey <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> details below, a few things to clean up for later alpha/betas.
> >>
> >> * checksums are all good
> >> * signatures are made with two different keys. should clean up by next
> >> alpha.
> >>
> >> src / bin artifacts are signed with 8ACC93D2, as you mentioned in the
> >> VOTE. However, this key is not in our project's KEYS file.
> >>
> >>
> > Yes. Will fix.
> >
> >
> >> maven staged repository are signed with 30CD0996, which is in our KEYS
> >> file so those check out fine.
> >>
> >> * the tag 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0 does point to
> >> c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc, which matches the source
> >> artifact after accounting HBASE-13088
> >>
> >> The tag isn't signed; would be good to make sure we do tag signing in
> >> betas so that it's ready to go come GA time.
> >>
> >>
> > Next time through, I'll update our 'How to RC' doc and will add above.
> >
> >
> >
> >> (side note, it would be good to get a decision on HBASE-13088 for the
> >> beta releases. been over 2 years)
> >>
> >> * the source tarball creates a binary assembly that looks as close to
> >> the posted binary artifact as I've seen branch-1 do.
> >>
> >> idle interest, but our binary convenience artifact has jumped from
> >> ~100MiB in branch-1 release to ~160MiB. If anyone has time to dig in
> >> on why, probably worth checking. (e.g. the docs directory is ~585 MiB
> >> when untared.)
> >>
> >>
> > Yes. Its obnoxious (HBASE-18208).
> >
> >
> >> * shaded artifact binaries are a reasonable number of MiB in size
> >> (incorrect build flags will result in ~empty jars)
> >>
> >> * LICENSE/NOTICE spot check looks okay.
> >>
> >> we have a ton of places where we have velocity variables instead of
> >> copyright years, but IIRC that's a problem on branch-1 right now too.
> >>
> >> * CHANGES file hasn't been updated correctly
> >>
> >> currently has details for 0.93.
> >>
> >>
> > Will fix next time through.
> >
> > Thanks Sean,
> > S
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Andrew Purtell <[hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >> > +1
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> The first release candidate for HBase 2.0.0-alpha-1 is up at:
> >> >>
> >> >>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-2.0.0-
> alpha-1RC0/
> >> >>
> >> >> Maven artifacts are available from a staging directory here:
> >> >>
> >> >>  https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
> >> hbase-1169
> >> >>
> >> >> All was signed w/ my key 8ACC93D2
> >> >> <http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9816C7FC8ACC93D2>
> >> >>
> >> >> I tagged the RC as 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0
> >> >> (c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc).
> >> >>
> >> >> hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 will be our first 2.0.0 release. It is a rough
> cut
> >> >> ('alpha') not-for-production preview of what hbase-2.0.0 will look
> >> like. It
> >> >> is what we used to call a 'Developer' release[1] meant mostly for
> devs
> >> and
> >> >> downstreamers to test drive and flag us early if we there are issues
> >> we’ve
> >> >> missed ahead of our rolling a production-worthy release.
> >> >>
> >> >> hbase-2.0.0 includes a fleet of new features that include a new
> >> assignment
> >> >> manager, means for keeping read and write path off-heap, in-memory
> >> >> compactions, and more. I have been keeping a running doc on the state
> >> of
> >> >> 2.0.0 here [2]. There is much to do still (see aforementioned doc).
> >> >>
> >> >> The list of features addressed in 2.0.0 so far can be found here [4].
> >> There
> >> >> are about 2500. The list of ~500 fixes in 2.0.0 exclusively can be
> >> found
> >> >> here [3].
> >> >>
> >> >> Please take it for a spin and vote on whether it ok to put out as our
> >> first
> >> >> alpha (bar is low for an 'alpha'). Let the VOTE be open for 24 hours.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> St.Ack
> >> >>
> >> >> 1. http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning.pre10
> >> >> 2.
> >> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_
> >> >> ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#heading=h.v21r9nz8g01j
> >> >> 3.
> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17852?jql=
> >> >> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.
> >> >> 0.0%20and%20fixVersion%20not%20in%20(1.0.0%2C%201.0.1%2C%
> >> >> 201.0.2%2C%201.0.3%2C%201.0.4%2C%201.0.5%2C%201.0.6%2C%201.
> >> >> 1.0%2C%201.1.1%2C%201.1.2%2C%201.1.3%2C%201.1.4%2C%201.1.5%
> >> >> 2C%201.1.6%2C%201.1.7%2C%201.1.8%2C%201.1.9%2C%201.1.10%2C%
> >> >> 201.2.0%2C%201.2.1%2C%201.2.2%2C%201.2.3%2C%201.2.4%2C%201.
> >> >> 2.5%2C%201.2.6%2C%201.3.0%2C%201.3.1%2C%201.4.0)%20and%20%
> >> >> 20(status%20%3D%20Open%20or%20status%20%3D%20%22Patch%
> 20Available%22)
> >> >> 4.
> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18191?jql=
> >> >> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20(%20fixVersion%20%3D%
> >> >> 202.0.0)%20and%20(status%20%3D%20Resolved)
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Best regards,
> >> >
> >> >    - Andy
> >> >
> >> > If you are given a choice, you believe you have acted freely. -
> Raymond
> >> > Teller (via Peter Watts)
> >>
> >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] First hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 Release Candidate is available

Josh Elser
Done ;)

There were two issues still tagged as alpha-1 (JIRA didn't want to show
me them before performing the action), but I bumped them to alpha-2.

On 6/20/17 12:19 PM, Mike Drob wrote:

> Hi Stack,
>
> Can you mark jira version 2.0.0-alpha-1 as released?
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 10:55 PM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> With 4 binding votes and 1 non-binding, vote passes. Let me push out the
>> alpha.
>> Thanks to all who voted.
>> St.Ack
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Great. Thanks Sean. In-line...
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:35 PM, Sean Busbey <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> details below, a few things to clean up for later alpha/betas.
>>>>
>>>> * checksums are all good
>>>> * signatures are made with two different keys. should clean up by next
>>>> alpha.
>>>>
>>>> src / bin artifacts are signed with 8ACC93D2, as you mentioned in the
>>>> VOTE. However, this key is not in our project's KEYS file.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Yes. Will fix.
>>>
>>>
>>>> maven staged repository are signed with 30CD0996, which is in our KEYS
>>>> file so those check out fine.
>>>>
>>>> * the tag 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0 does point to
>>>> c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc, which matches the source
>>>> artifact after accounting HBASE-13088
>>>>
>>>> The tag isn't signed; would be good to make sure we do tag signing in
>>>> betas so that it's ready to go come GA time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Next time through, I'll update our 'How to RC' doc and will add above.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> (side note, it would be good to get a decision on HBASE-13088 for the
>>>> beta releases. been over 2 years)
>>>>
>>>> * the source tarball creates a binary assembly that looks as close to
>>>> the posted binary artifact as I've seen branch-1 do.
>>>>
>>>> idle interest, but our binary convenience artifact has jumped from
>>>> ~100MiB in branch-1 release to ~160MiB. If anyone has time to dig in
>>>> on why, probably worth checking. (e.g. the docs directory is ~585 MiB
>>>> when untared.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Yes. Its obnoxious (HBASE-18208).
>>>
>>>
>>>> * shaded artifact binaries are a reasonable number of MiB in size
>>>> (incorrect build flags will result in ~empty jars)
>>>>
>>>> * LICENSE/NOTICE spot check looks okay.
>>>>
>>>> we have a ton of places where we have velocity variables instead of
>>>> copyright years, but IIRC that's a problem on branch-1 right now too.
>>>>
>>>> * CHANGES file hasn't been updated correctly
>>>>
>>>> currently has details for 0.93.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Will fix next time through.
>>>
>>> Thanks Sean,
>>> S
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Andrew Purtell <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The first release candidate for HBase 2.0.0-alpha-1 is up at:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-2.0.0-
>> alpha-1RC0/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maven artifacts are available from a staging directory here:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>>>> hbase-1169
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All was signed w/ my key 8ACC93D2
>>>>>> <http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9816C7FC8ACC93D2>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I tagged the RC as 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0
>>>>>> (c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 will be our first 2.0.0 release. It is a rough
>> cut
>>>>>> ('alpha') not-for-production preview of what hbase-2.0.0 will look
>>>> like. It
>>>>>> is what we used to call a 'Developer' release[1] meant mostly for
>> devs
>>>> and
>>>>>> downstreamers to test drive and flag us early if we there are issues
>>>> we’ve
>>>>>> missed ahead of our rolling a production-worthy release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> hbase-2.0.0 includes a fleet of new features that include a new
>>>> assignment
>>>>>> manager, means for keeping read and write path off-heap, in-memory
>>>>>> compactions, and more. I have been keeping a running doc on the state
>>>> of
>>>>>> 2.0.0 here [2]. There is much to do still (see aforementioned doc).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The list of features addressed in 2.0.0 so far can be found here [4].
>>>> There
>>>>>> are about 2500. The list of ~500 fixes in 2.0.0 exclusively can be
>>>> found
>>>>>> here [3].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please take it for a spin and vote on whether it ok to put out as our
>>>> first
>>>>>> alpha (bar is low for an 'alpha'). Let the VOTE be open for 24 hours.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning.pre10
>>>>>> 2.
>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_
>>>>>> ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#heading=h.v21r9nz8g01j
>>>>>> 3.
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17852?jql=
>>>>>> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.
>>>>>> 0.0%20and%20fixVersion%20not%20in%20(1.0.0%2C%201.0.1%2C%
>>>>>> 201.0.2%2C%201.0.3%2C%201.0.4%2C%201.0.5%2C%201.0.6%2C%201.
>>>>>> 1.0%2C%201.1.1%2C%201.1.2%2C%201.1.3%2C%201.1.4%2C%201.1.5%
>>>>>> 2C%201.1.6%2C%201.1.7%2C%201.1.8%2C%201.1.9%2C%201.1.10%2C%
>>>>>> 201.2.0%2C%201.2.1%2C%201.2.2%2C%201.2.3%2C%201.2.4%2C%201.
>>>>>> 2.5%2C%201.2.6%2C%201.3.0%2C%201.3.1%2C%201.4.0)%20and%20%
>>>>>> 20(status%20%3D%20Open%20or%20status%20%3D%20%22Patch%
>> 20Available%22)
>>>>>> 4.
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18191?jql=
>>>>>> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20(%20fixVersion%20%3D%
>>>>>> 202.0.0)%20and%20(status%20%3D%20Resolved)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>>     - Andy
>>>>>
>>>>> If you are given a choice, you believe you have acted freely. -
>> Raymond
>>>>> Teller (via Peter Watts)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] First hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 Release Candidate is available

stack-3
Thanks Josh.

Sean noticed that I'd not actually pushed the alpha to our release dir.
Just did that.

St.Ack

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Josh Elser <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Done ;)
>
> There were two issues still tagged as alpha-1 (JIRA didn't want to show me
> them before performing the action), but I bumped them to alpha-2.
>
>
> On 6/20/17 12:19 PM, Mike Drob wrote:
>
>> Hi Stack,
>>
>> Can you mark jira version 2.0.0-alpha-1 as released?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mike
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 10:55 PM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> With 4 binding votes and 1 non-binding, vote passes. Let me push out the
>>> alpha.
>>> Thanks to all who voted.
>>> St.Ack
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Great. Thanks Sean. In-line...
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:35 PM, Sean Busbey <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> details below, a few things to clean up for later alpha/betas.
>>>>>
>>>>> * checksums are all good
>>>>> * signatures are made with two different keys. should clean up by next
>>>>> alpha.
>>>>>
>>>>> src / bin artifacts are signed with 8ACC93D2, as you mentioned in the
>>>>> VOTE. However, this key is not in our project's KEYS file.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes. Will fix.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> maven staged repository are signed with 30CD0996, which is in our KEYS
>>>>> file so those check out fine.
>>>>>
>>>>> * the tag 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0 does point to
>>>>> c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc, which matches the source
>>>>> artifact after accounting HBASE-13088
>>>>>
>>>>> The tag isn't signed; would be good to make sure we do tag signing in
>>>>> betas so that it's ready to go come GA time.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Next time through, I'll update our 'How to RC' doc and will add above.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (side note, it would be good to get a decision on HBASE-13088 for the
>>>>> beta releases. been over 2 years)
>>>>>
>>>>> * the source tarball creates a binary assembly that looks as close to
>>>>> the posted binary artifact as I've seen branch-1 do.
>>>>>
>>>>> idle interest, but our binary convenience artifact has jumped from
>>>>> ~100MiB in branch-1 release to ~160MiB. If anyone has time to dig in
>>>>> on why, probably worth checking. (e.g. the docs directory is ~585 MiB
>>>>> when untared.)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes. Its obnoxious (HBASE-18208).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> * shaded artifact binaries are a reasonable number of MiB in size
>>>>> (incorrect build flags will result in ~empty jars)
>>>>>
>>>>> * LICENSE/NOTICE spot check looks okay.
>>>>>
>>>>> we have a ton of places where we have velocity variables instead of
>>>>> copyright years, but IIRC that's a problem on branch-1 right now too.
>>>>>
>>>>> * CHANGES file hasn't been updated correctly
>>>>>
>>>>> currently has details for 0.93.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Will fix next time through.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Sean,
>>>> S
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Andrew Purtell <[hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The first release candidate for HBase 2.0.0-alpha-1 is up at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-2.0.0-
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> alpha-1RC0/
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Maven artifacts are available from a staging directory here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> hbase-1169
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All was signed w/ my key 8ACC93D2
>>>>>>> <http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9816C7FC8ACC93D2>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I tagged the RC as 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0
>>>>>>> (c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 will be our first 2.0.0 release. It is a rough
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> cut
>>>
>>>> ('alpha') not-for-production preview of what hbase-2.0.0 will look
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> like. It
>>>>>
>>>>>> is what we used to call a 'Developer' release[1] meant mostly for
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> devs
>>>
>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>>> downstreamers to test drive and flag us early if we there are issues
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> we’ve
>>>>>
>>>>>> missed ahead of our rolling a production-worthy release.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hbase-2.0.0 includes a fleet of new features that include a new
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> assignment
>>>>>
>>>>>> manager, means for keeping read and write path off-heap, in-memory
>>>>>>> compactions, and more. I have been keeping a running doc on the state
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> of
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2.0.0 here [2]. There is much to do still (see aforementioned doc).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The list of features addressed in 2.0.0 so far can be found here [4].
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> There
>>>>>
>>>>>> are about 2500. The list of ~500 fixes in 2.0.0 exclusively can be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> found
>>>>>
>>>>>> here [3].
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please take it for a spin and vote on whether it ok to put out as our
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> first
>>>>>
>>>>>> alpha (bar is low for an 'alpha'). Let the VOTE be open for 24 hours.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning.pre10
>>>>>>> 2.
>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_
>>>>>>> ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#heading=h.v21r9nz8g01j
>>>>>>> 3.
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17852?jql=
>>>>>>> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.
>>>>>>> 0.0%20and%20fixVersion%20not%20in%20(1.0.0%2C%201.0.1%2C%
>>>>>>> 201.0.2%2C%201.0.3%2C%201.0.4%2C%201.0.5%2C%201.0.6%2C%201.
>>>>>>> 1.0%2C%201.1.1%2C%201.1.2%2C%201.1.3%2C%201.1.4%2C%201.1.5%
>>>>>>> 2C%201.1.6%2C%201.1.7%2C%201.1.8%2C%201.1.9%2C%201.1.10%2C%
>>>>>>> 201.2.0%2C%201.2.1%2C%201.2.2%2C%201.2.3%2C%201.2.4%2C%201.
>>>>>>> 2.5%2C%201.2.6%2C%201.3.0%2C%201.3.1%2C%201.4.0)%20and%20%
>>>>>>> 20(status%20%3D%20Open%20or%20status%20%3D%20%22Patch%
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> 20Available%22)
>>>
>>>> 4.
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18191?jql=
>>>>>>> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20(%20fixVersion%20%3D%
>>>>>>> 202.0.0)%20and%20(status%20%3D%20Resolved)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     - Andy
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you are given a choice, you believe you have acted freely. -
>>>>>>
>>>>> Raymond
>>>
>>>> Teller (via Peter Watts)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] First hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 Release Candidate is available

Phil Yang
In JIRA there are many resolved issues whose fix version is 2.0.0, they are
"released" when 2.0.0-alpha-1 released, do we need change them to
2.0.0-alpha-1? 2.0.0 should be a formal version after alpha/beta?

Thanks,
Phil


2017-06-21 1:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <[hidden email]>:

> Thanks Josh.
>
> Sean noticed that I'd not actually pushed the alpha to our release dir.
> Just did that.
>
> St.Ack
>
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Josh Elser <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Done ;)
> >
> > There were two issues still tagged as alpha-1 (JIRA didn't want to show
> me
> > them before performing the action), but I bumped them to alpha-2.
> >
> >
> > On 6/20/17 12:19 PM, Mike Drob wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Stack,
> >>
> >> Can you mark jira version 2.0.0-alpha-1 as released?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Mike
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 10:55 PM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> With 4 binding votes and 1 non-binding, vote passes. Let me push out the
> >>> alpha.
> >>> Thanks to all who voted.
> >>> St.Ack
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Great. Thanks Sean. In-line...
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:35 PM, Sean Busbey <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> details below, a few things to clean up for later alpha/betas.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * checksums are all good
> >>>>> * signatures are made with two different keys. should clean up by
> next
> >>>>> alpha.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> src / bin artifacts are signed with 8ACC93D2, as you mentioned in the
> >>>>> VOTE. However, this key is not in our project's KEYS file.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes. Will fix.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> maven staged repository are signed with 30CD0996, which is in our KEYS
> >>>>> file so those check out fine.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * the tag 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0 does point to
> >>>>> c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc, which matches the source
> >>>>> artifact after accounting HBASE-13088
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The tag isn't signed; would be good to make sure we do tag signing in
> >>>>> betas so that it's ready to go come GA time.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Next time through, I'll update our 'How to RC' doc and will add
> above.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> (side note, it would be good to get a decision on HBASE-13088 for the
> >>>>> beta releases. been over 2 years)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * the source tarball creates a binary assembly that looks as close to
> >>>>> the posted binary artifact as I've seen branch-1 do.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> idle interest, but our binary convenience artifact has jumped from
> >>>>> ~100MiB in branch-1 release to ~160MiB. If anyone has time to dig in
> >>>>> on why, probably worth checking. (e.g. the docs directory is ~585 MiB
> >>>>> when untared.)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes. Its obnoxious (HBASE-18208).
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> * shaded artifact binaries are a reasonable number of MiB in size
> >>>>> (incorrect build flags will result in ~empty jars)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * LICENSE/NOTICE spot check looks okay.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> we have a ton of places where we have velocity variables instead of
> >>>>> copyright years, but IIRC that's a problem on branch-1 right now too.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * CHANGES file hasn't been updated correctly
> >>>>>
> >>>>> currently has details for 0.93.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Will fix next time through.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks Sean,
> >>>> S
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Andrew Purtell <[hidden email]>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The first release candidate for HBase 2.0.0-alpha-1 is up at:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-2.0.0-
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> alpha-1RC0/
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> Maven artifacts are available from a staging directory here:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>   https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> hbase-1169
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> All was signed w/ my key 8ACC93D2
> >>>>>>> <http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9816C7FC8ACC93D2>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I tagged the RC as 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0
> >>>>>>> (c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 will be our first 2.0.0 release. It is a rough
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> cut
> >>>
> >>>> ('alpha') not-for-production preview of what hbase-2.0.0 will look
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> like. It
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> is what we used to call a 'Developer' release[1] meant mostly for
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> devs
> >>>
> >>>> and
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> downstreamers to test drive and flag us early if we there are issues
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> we’ve
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> missed ahead of our rolling a production-worthy release.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> hbase-2.0.0 includes a fleet of new features that include a new
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> assignment
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> manager, means for keeping read and write path off-heap, in-memory
> >>>>>>> compactions, and more. I have been keeping a running doc on the
> state
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> 2.0.0 here [2]. There is much to do still (see aforementioned doc).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The list of features addressed in 2.0.0 so far can be found here
> [4].
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> There
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> are about 2500. The list of ~500 fixes in 2.0.0 exclusively can be
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> found
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> here [3].
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please take it for a spin and vote on whether it ok to put out as
> our
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> first
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> alpha (bar is low for an 'alpha'). Let the VOTE be open for 24
> hours.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>> St.Ack
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 1. http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning.pre10
> >>>>>>> 2.
> >>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_
> >>>>>>> ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#heading=h.v21r9nz8g01j
> >>>>>>> 3.
> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17852?jql=
> >>>>>>> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.
> >>>>>>> 0.0%20and%20fixVersion%20not%20in%20(1.0.0%2C%201.0.1%2C%
> >>>>>>> 201.0.2%2C%201.0.3%2C%201.0.4%2C%201.0.5%2C%201.0.6%2C%201.
> >>>>>>> 1.0%2C%201.1.1%2C%201.1.2%2C%201.1.3%2C%201.1.4%2C%201.1.5%
> >>>>>>> 2C%201.1.6%2C%201.1.7%2C%201.1.8%2C%201.1.9%2C%201.1.10%2C%
> >>>>>>> 201.2.0%2C%201.2.1%2C%201.2.2%2C%201.2.3%2C%201.2.4%2C%201.
> >>>>>>> 2.5%2C%201.2.6%2C%201.3.0%2C%201.3.1%2C%201.4.0)%20and%20%
> >>>>>>> 20(status%20%3D%20Open%20or%20status%20%3D%20%22Patch%
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> 20Available%22)
> >>>
> >>>> 4.
> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18191?jql=
> >>>>>>> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20(%20fixVersion%20%3D%
> >>>>>>> 202.0.0)%20and%20(status%20%3D%20Resolved)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>     - Andy
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If you are given a choice, you believe you have acted freely. -
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Raymond
> >>>
> >>>> Teller (via Peter Watts)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] First hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 Release Candidate is available

Phil Yang
Or we can just rename 2.0.0 version to alpha-1 and delete the current
alpha-1 and move issues under old alpha-1 to new one?

Thanks,
Phil


2017-06-21 11:20 GMT+08:00 Phil Yang <[hidden email]>:

> In JIRA there are many resolved issues whose fix version is 2.0.0, they
> are "released" when 2.0.0-alpha-1 released, do we need change them to
> 2.0.0-alpha-1? 2.0.0 should be a formal version after alpha/beta?
>
> Thanks,
> Phil
>
>
> 2017-06-21 1:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <[hidden email]>:
>
>> Thanks Josh.
>>
>> Sean noticed that I'd not actually pushed the alpha to our release dir.
>> Just did that.
>>
>> St.Ack
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Josh Elser <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> > Done ;)
>> >
>> > There were two issues still tagged as alpha-1 (JIRA didn't want to show
>> me
>> > them before performing the action), but I bumped them to alpha-2.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 6/20/17 12:19 PM, Mike Drob wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Stack,
>> >>
>> >> Can you mark jira version 2.0.0-alpha-1 as released?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Mike
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 10:55 PM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> With 4 binding votes and 1 non-binding, vote passes. Let me push out
>> the
>> >>> alpha.
>> >>> Thanks to all who voted.
>> >>> St.Ack
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Great. Thanks Sean. In-line...
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:35 PM, Sean Busbey <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> +1
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> details below, a few things to clean up for later alpha/betas.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> * checksums are all good
>> >>>>> * signatures are made with two different keys. should clean up by
>> next
>> >>>>> alpha.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> src / bin artifacts are signed with 8ACC93D2, as you mentioned in
>> the
>> >>>>> VOTE. However, this key is not in our project's KEYS file.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Yes. Will fix.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> maven staged repository are signed with 30CD0996, which is in our
>> KEYS
>> >>>>> file so those check out fine.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> * the tag 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0 does point to
>> >>>>> c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc, which matches the source
>> >>>>> artifact after accounting HBASE-13088
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The tag isn't signed; would be good to make sure we do tag signing
>> in
>> >>>>> betas so that it's ready to go come GA time.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Next time through, I'll update our 'How to RC' doc and will add
>> above.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> (side note, it would be good to get a decision on HBASE-13088 for the
>> >>>>> beta releases. been over 2 years)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> * the source tarball creates a binary assembly that looks as close
>> to
>> >>>>> the posted binary artifact as I've seen branch-1 do.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> idle interest, but our binary convenience artifact has jumped from
>> >>>>> ~100MiB in branch-1 release to ~160MiB. If anyone has time to dig in
>> >>>>> on why, probably worth checking. (e.g. the docs directory is ~585
>> MiB
>> >>>>> when untared.)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Yes. Its obnoxious (HBASE-18208).
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> * shaded artifact binaries are a reasonable number of MiB in size
>> >>>>> (incorrect build flags will result in ~empty jars)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> * LICENSE/NOTICE spot check looks okay.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> we have a ton of places where we have velocity variables instead of
>> >>>>> copyright years, but IIRC that's a problem on branch-1 right now
>> too.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> * CHANGES file hasn't been updated correctly
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> currently has details for 0.93.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Will fix next time through.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thanks Sean,
>> >>>> S
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Andrew Purtell <[hidden email]
>> >
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> +1
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> The first release candidate for HBase 2.0.0-alpha-1 is up at:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-2.0.0-
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> alpha-1RC0/
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>>> Maven artifacts are available from a staging directory here:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>   https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> hbase-1169
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> All was signed w/ my key 8ACC93D2
>> >>>>>>> <http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9816C7FC8ACC93D2>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I tagged the RC as 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0
>> >>>>>>> (c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc).
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 will be our first 2.0.0 release. It is a rough
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> cut
>> >>>
>> >>>> ('alpha') not-for-production preview of what hbase-2.0.0 will look
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> like. It
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> is what we used to call a 'Developer' release[1] meant mostly for
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> devs
>> >>>
>> >>>> and
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> downstreamers to test drive and flag us early if we there are
>> issues
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> we’ve
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> missed ahead of our rolling a production-worthy release.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> hbase-2.0.0 includes a fleet of new features that include a new
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> assignment
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> manager, means for keeping read and write path off-heap, in-memory
>> >>>>>>> compactions, and more. I have been keeping a running doc on the
>> state
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> of
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> 2.0.0 here [2]. There is much to do still (see aforementioned doc).
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> The list of features addressed in 2.0.0 so far can be found here
>> [4].
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> There
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> are about 2500. The list of ~500 fixes in 2.0.0 exclusively can be
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> found
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> here [3].
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Please take it for a spin and vote on whether it ok to put out as
>> our
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> first
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> alpha (bar is low for an 'alpha'). Let the VOTE be open for 24
>> hours.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Thanks,
>> >>>>>>> St.Ack
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> 1. http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning.pre10
>> >>>>>>> 2.
>> >>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_
>> >>>>>>> ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#heading=h.v21r9nz8g01j
>> >>>>>>> 3.
>> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17852?jql=
>> >>>>>>> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.
>> >>>>>>> 0.0%20and%20fixVersion%20not%20in%20(1.0.0%2C%201.0.1%2C%
>> >>>>>>> 201.0.2%2C%201.0.3%2C%201.0.4%2C%201.0.5%2C%201.0.6%2C%201.
>> >>>>>>> 1.0%2C%201.1.1%2C%201.1.2%2C%201.1.3%2C%201.1.4%2C%201.1.5%
>> >>>>>>> 2C%201.1.6%2C%201.1.7%2C%201.1.8%2C%201.1.9%2C%201.1.10%2C%
>> >>>>>>> 201.2.0%2C%201.2.1%2C%201.2.2%2C%201.2.3%2C%201.2.4%2C%201.
>> >>>>>>> 2.5%2C%201.2.6%2C%201.3.0%2C%201.3.1%2C%201.4.0)%20and%20%
>> >>>>>>> 20(status%20%3D%20Open%20or%20status%20%3D%20%22Patch%
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> 20Available%22)
>> >>>
>> >>>> 4.
>> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18191?jql=
>> >>>>>>> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20(%20fixVersion%20%3D%
>> >>>>>>> 202.0.0)%20and%20(status%20%3D%20Resolved)
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> --
>> >>>>>> Best regards,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>     - Andy
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> If you are given a choice, you believe you have acted freely. -
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>> Raymond
>> >>>
>> >>>> Teller (via Peter Watts)
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] First hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 Release Candidate is available

Sean Busbey-3
cleaning them up sounds like a good idea, but bulk version shifts are
always a nightmare. Probably some version rename will be the least
painful way to fix it.

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Phil Yang <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Or we can just rename 2.0.0 version to alpha-1 and delete the current
> alpha-1 and move issues under old alpha-1 to new one?
>
> Thanks,
> Phil
>
>
> 2017-06-21 11:20 GMT+08:00 Phil Yang <[hidden email]>:
>
>> In JIRA there are many resolved issues whose fix version is 2.0.0, they
>> are "released" when 2.0.0-alpha-1 released, do we need change them to
>> 2.0.0-alpha-1? 2.0.0 should be a formal version after alpha/beta?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Phil
>>
>>
>> 2017-06-21 1:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <[hidden email]>:
>>
>>> Thanks Josh.
>>>
>>> Sean noticed that I'd not actually pushed the alpha to our release dir.
>>> Just did that.
>>>
>>> St.Ack
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Josh Elser <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Done ;)
>>> >
>>> > There were two issues still tagged as alpha-1 (JIRA didn't want to show
>>> me
>>> > them before performing the action), but I bumped them to alpha-2.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 6/20/17 12:19 PM, Mike Drob wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Hi Stack,
>>> >>
>>> >> Can you mark jira version 2.0.0-alpha-1 as released?
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks,
>>> >> Mike
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 10:55 PM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> With 4 binding votes and 1 non-binding, vote passes. Let me push out
>>> the
>>> >>> alpha.
>>> >>> Thanks to all who voted.
>>> >>> St.Ack
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Great. Thanks Sean. In-line...
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:35 PM, Sean Busbey <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> +1
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> details below, a few things to clean up for later alpha/betas.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> * checksums are all good
>>> >>>>> * signatures are made with two different keys. should clean up by
>>> next
>>> >>>>> alpha.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> src / bin artifacts are signed with 8ACC93D2, as you mentioned in
>>> the
>>> >>>>> VOTE. However, this key is not in our project's KEYS file.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Yes. Will fix.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> maven staged repository are signed with 30CD0996, which is in our
>>> KEYS
>>> >>>>> file so those check out fine.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> * the tag 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0 does point to
>>> >>>>> c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc, which matches the source
>>> >>>>> artifact after accounting HBASE-13088
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> The tag isn't signed; would be good to make sure we do tag signing
>>> in
>>> >>>>> betas so that it's ready to go come GA time.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Next time through, I'll update our 'How to RC' doc and will add
>>> above.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> (side note, it would be good to get a decision on HBASE-13088 for the
>>> >>>>> beta releases. been over 2 years)
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> * the source tarball creates a binary assembly that looks as close
>>> to
>>> >>>>> the posted binary artifact as I've seen branch-1 do.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> idle interest, but our binary convenience artifact has jumped from
>>> >>>>> ~100MiB in branch-1 release to ~160MiB. If anyone has time to dig in
>>> >>>>> on why, probably worth checking. (e.g. the docs directory is ~585
>>> MiB
>>> >>>>> when untared.)
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Yes. Its obnoxious (HBASE-18208).
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> * shaded artifact binaries are a reasonable number of MiB in size
>>> >>>>> (incorrect build flags will result in ~empty jars)
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> * LICENSE/NOTICE spot check looks okay.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> we have a ton of places where we have velocity variables instead of
>>> >>>>> copyright years, but IIRC that's a problem on branch-1 right now
>>> too.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> * CHANGES file hasn't been updated correctly
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> currently has details for 0.93.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Will fix next time through.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Thanks Sean,
>>> >>>> S
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Andrew Purtell <[hidden email]
>>> >
>>> >>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> +1
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> The first release candidate for HBase 2.0.0-alpha-1 is up at:
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-2.0.0-
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> alpha-1RC0/
>>> >>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Maven artifacts are available from a staging directory here:
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>   https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> hbase-1169
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> All was signed w/ my key 8ACC93D2
>>> >>>>>>> <http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9816C7FC8ACC93D2>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> I tagged the RC as 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0
>>> >>>>>>> (c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc).
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 will be our first 2.0.0 release. It is a rough
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> cut
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> ('alpha') not-for-production preview of what hbase-2.0.0 will look
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> like. It
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> is what we used to call a 'Developer' release[1] meant mostly for
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> devs
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> and
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> downstreamers to test drive and flag us early if we there are
>>> issues
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> we’ve
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> missed ahead of our rolling a production-worthy release.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> hbase-2.0.0 includes a fleet of new features that include a new
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> assignment
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> manager, means for keeping read and write path off-heap, in-memory
>>> >>>>>>> compactions, and more. I have been keeping a running doc on the
>>> state
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> of
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> 2.0.0 here [2]. There is much to do still (see aforementioned doc).
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> The list of features addressed in 2.0.0 so far can be found here
>>> [4].
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> There
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> are about 2500. The list of ~500 fixes in 2.0.0 exclusively can be
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> found
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> here [3].
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Please take it for a spin and vote on whether it ok to put out as
>>> our
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> first
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> alpha (bar is low for an 'alpha'). Let the VOTE be open for 24
>>> hours.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Thanks,
>>> >>>>>>> St.Ack
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> 1. http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning.pre10
>>> >>>>>>> 2.
>>> >>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_
>>> >>>>>>> ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#heading=h.v21r9nz8g01j
>>> >>>>>>> 3.
>>> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17852?jql=
>>> >>>>>>> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.
>>> >>>>>>> 0.0%20and%20fixVersion%20not%20in%20(1.0.0%2C%201.0.1%2C%
>>> >>>>>>> 201.0.2%2C%201.0.3%2C%201.0.4%2C%201.0.5%2C%201.0.6%2C%201.
>>> >>>>>>> 1.0%2C%201.1.1%2C%201.1.2%2C%201.1.3%2C%201.1.4%2C%201.1.5%
>>> >>>>>>> 2C%201.1.6%2C%201.1.7%2C%201.1.8%2C%201.1.9%2C%201.1.10%2C%
>>> >>>>>>> 201.2.0%2C%201.2.1%2C%201.2.2%2C%201.2.3%2C%201.2.4%2C%201.
>>> >>>>>>> 2.5%2C%201.2.6%2C%201.3.0%2C%201.3.1%2C%201.4.0)%20and%20%
>>> >>>>>>> 20(status%20%3D%20Open%20or%20status%20%3D%20%22Patch%
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> 20Available%22)
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> 4.
>>> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18191?jql=
>>> >>>>>>> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20(%20fixVersion%20%3D%
>>> >>>>>>> 202.0.0)%20and%20(status%20%3D%20Resolved)
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>> Best regards,
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>     - Andy
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> If you are given a choice, you believe you have acted freely. -
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>> Raymond
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> Teller (via Peter Watts)
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>>
>>
>>



--
Sean
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] First hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 Release Candidate is available

stack-3
In reply to this post by Phil Yang
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Phil Yang <[hidden email]> wrote:

> In JIRA there are many resolved issues whose fix version is 2.0.0, they are
> "released" when 2.0.0-alpha-1 released, do we need change them to
> 2.0.0-alpha-1? 2.0.0 should be a formal version after alpha/beta?
>
>
IMO fixes/features marked 2.0.0, while they appear in 2.0.0-alpha-1, they
are not 'released' until we make a generally available hbase 2, i.e.
hbase-2.0.0; a release for our general user base.

St.Ack




> Thanks,
> Phil
>
>
> 2017-06-21 1:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Thanks Josh.
> >
> > Sean noticed that I'd not actually pushed the alpha to our release dir.
> > Just did that.
> >
> > St.Ack
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Josh Elser <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Done ;)
> > >
> > > There were two issues still tagged as alpha-1 (JIRA didn't want to show
> > me
> > > them before performing the action), but I bumped them to alpha-2.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 6/20/17 12:19 PM, Mike Drob wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Stack,
> > >>
> > >> Can you mark jira version 2.0.0-alpha-1 as released?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Mike
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 10:55 PM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> With 4 binding votes and 1 non-binding, vote passes. Let me push out
> the
> > >>> alpha.
> > >>> Thanks to all who voted.
> > >>> St.Ack
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Great. Thanks Sean. In-line...
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:35 PM, Sean Busbey <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> +1
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> details below, a few things to clean up for later alpha/betas.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> * checksums are all good
> > >>>>> * signatures are made with two different keys. should clean up by
> > next
> > >>>>> alpha.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> src / bin artifacts are signed with 8ACC93D2, as you mentioned in
> the
> > >>>>> VOTE. However, this key is not in our project's KEYS file.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Yes. Will fix.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> maven staged repository are signed with 30CD0996, which is in our
> KEYS
> > >>>>> file so those check out fine.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> * the tag 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0 does point to
> > >>>>> c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc, which matches the source
> > >>>>> artifact after accounting HBASE-13088
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The tag isn't signed; would be good to make sure we do tag signing
> in
> > >>>>> betas so that it's ready to go come GA time.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Next time through, I'll update our 'How to RC' doc and will add
> > above.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> (side note, it would be good to get a decision on HBASE-13088 for
> the
> > >>>>> beta releases. been over 2 years)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> * the source tarball creates a binary assembly that looks as close
> to
> > >>>>> the posted binary artifact as I've seen branch-1 do.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> idle interest, but our binary convenience artifact has jumped from
> > >>>>> ~100MiB in branch-1 release to ~160MiB. If anyone has time to dig
> in
> > >>>>> on why, probably worth checking. (e.g. the docs directory is ~585
> MiB
> > >>>>> when untared.)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Yes. Its obnoxious (HBASE-18208).
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * shaded artifact binaries are a reasonable number of MiB in size
> > >>>>> (incorrect build flags will result in ~empty jars)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> * LICENSE/NOTICE spot check looks okay.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> we have a ton of places where we have velocity variables instead of
> > >>>>> copyright years, but IIRC that's a problem on branch-1 right now
> too.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> * CHANGES file hasn't been updated correctly
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> currently has details for 0.93.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Will fix next time through.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks Sean,
> > >>>> S
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> [hidden email]>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> +1
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Stack <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The first release candidate for HBase 2.0.0-alpha-1 is up at:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-2.0.0-
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> alpha-1RC0/
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>>> Maven artifacts are available from a staging directory here:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>   https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> hbase-1169
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> All was signed w/ my key 8ACC93D2
> > >>>>>>> <http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9816C7FC8ACC93D2>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I tagged the RC as 2.0.0-alpha-1RC0
> > >>>>>>> (c830a0f47f58d4892dd3300032c8244d6278aecc).
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> hbase-2.0.0-alpha-1 will be our first 2.0.0 release. It is a
> rough
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> cut
> > >>>
> > >>>> ('alpha') not-for-production preview of what hbase-2.0.0 will look
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> like. It
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> is what we used to call a 'Developer' release[1] meant mostly for
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> devs
> > >>>
> > >>>> and
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> downstreamers to test drive and flag us early if we there are
> issues
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> we’ve
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> missed ahead of our rolling a production-worthy release.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> hbase-2.0.0 includes a fleet of new features that include a new
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> assignment
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> manager, means for keeping read and write path off-heap, in-memory
> > >>>>>>> compactions, and more. I have been keeping a running doc on the
> > state
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> of
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> 2.0.0 here [2]. There is much to do still (see aforementioned
> doc).
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> The list of features addressed in 2.0.0 so far can be found here
> > [4].
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> There
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> are about 2500. The list of ~500 fixes in 2.0.0 exclusively can be
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> found
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> here [3].
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Please take it for a spin and vote on whether it ok to put out as
> > our
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> first
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> alpha (bar is low for an 'alpha'). Let the VOTE be open for 24
> > hours.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>> St.Ack
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> 1. http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning.pre10
> > >>>>>>> 2.
> > >>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_
> > >>>>>>> ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#heading=h.v21r9nz8g01j
> > >>>>>>> 3.
> > >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17852?jql=
> > >>>>>>> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.
> > >>>>>>> 0.0%20and%20fixVersion%20not%20in%20(1.0.0%2C%201.0.1%2C%
> > >>>>>>> 201.0.2%2C%201.0.3%2C%201.0.4%2C%201.0.5%2C%201.0.6%2C%201.
> > >>>>>>> 1.0%2C%201.1.1%2C%201.1.2%2C%201.1.3%2C%201.1.4%2C%201.1.5%
> > >>>>>>> 2C%201.1.6%2C%201.1.7%2C%201.1.8%2C%201.1.9%2C%201.1.10%2C%
> > >>>>>>> 201.2.0%2C%201.2.1%2C%201.2.2%2C%201.2.3%2C%201.2.4%2C%201.
> > >>>>>>> 2.5%2C%201.2.6%2C%201.3.0%2C%201.3.1%2C%201.4.0)%20and%20%
> > >>>>>>> 20(status%20%3D%20Open%20or%20status%20%3D%20%22Patch%
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> 20Available%22)
> > >>>
> > >>>> 4.
> > >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18191?jql=
> > >>>>>>> project%20%3D%20HBASE%20%20and%20(%20fixVersion%20%3D%
> > >>>>>>> 202.0.0)%20and%20(status%20%3D%20Resolved)
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>     - Andy
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> If you are given a choice, you believe you have acted freely. -
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> Raymond
> > >>>
> > >>>> Teller (via Peter Watts)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>
Loading...