On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 12:59 PM Ahmet Altay <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thank you JB. > > For clarification, are you referring to the following items: > - RabbitMqIO - https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/1729 > - ParquetIO on HDFS/S3 - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-4421 > > If the above mapping is correct, could we separate addition of new feature > from addressing blocking issues? I would propose that we do not block the > release for the former one and fix the latter one before the release. > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 10:26 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I would like to merge RabbitMqIO (we are doing the final touches) and we >> have an issue about ParquetIO on HDFS/S3 that I would like to >> investigate with the team. >> > > Do you know who is currently investigating the ParquetIO issue? Do you > need help with that? > Do we know if this is a regression, or has it never worked? > I plan to start the release process asap, hopefully later today. >> > That would be great. A lot has happened since the last release [1] and we've had a pretty good cadence so far in 2018 so it'd be nice to get this out in to the hands of our users. And thanks for volunteering to do the release! - Robert [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/compare/release-2.4.0...master > >> Regards >> JB >> >> On 29/05/2018 23:00, Ahmet Altay wrote: >> > Thank you JB for the update. Could we start the release process now? Is >> > there anyway I could help with moving the release forward? >> > >> > On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 8:19 AM, Lukasz Cwik <[email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > >> > Thanks for the update JB. >> > >> > Kenn, we have the post commit integration tests which run against >> > shaded artifacts like validates runner. We also have the nightly >> > snapshot and its verification run which validates the nightly >> > snapshot with DirectRunner / Dataflow / Apex / Spark / Flink for >> > WordCount and DirectRunner / Dataflow for the mobile gaming >> examples. >> > >> > I'm not sure about the IOs and whether the perfkit benchmark work >> > adequately covers them. >> > >> > >> > On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 1:28 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Luke, >> > >> > I tested the following build: >> > >> > ./gradlew publishToMavenLocal -PisRelease --no-parallel >> > >> > The artifacts are present in my .m2/repository. >> > >> > For instance, I can see: >> > >> > .m2/repository/org/apache/beam/beam-sdks-java-core/2.5.0$ ls -l >> > total 16256 >> > beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0.jar >> > beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0.jar.asc >> > beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-javadoc.jar >> > beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-javadoc.jar.asc >> > beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0.pom >> > beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0.pom.asc >> > beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-sources.jar >> > beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-sources.jar.asc >> > beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-tests.jar >> > beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-tests.jar.asc >> > beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-test-sources.jar >> > beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0-test-sources.jar.asc >> > >> > 1. The signatures are OK: >> > >> > gpg --verify beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0.jar.asc >> > beam-sdks-java-core-2.5.0.jar >> > gpg: Signature made jeu. 24 mai 2018 16:55:11 CEST >> > gpg: using RSA key >> > 1AA8CF92D409A73393D0B736BFF2EE42C8282E76 >> > gpg: Good signature from "Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>" >> > [unknown] >> > >> > 2. The pom looks correct to me but it's not optimal because >> > >> > 2.1. There's no parent definition, so each pom duplicate the >> same >> > configurations (like scm, license, etc) >> > 2.2. There's no Maven plugin configuration, even if it's not >> > used for >> > the build, other tools can parse and use plugin configuration >> > (like the >> > source/target version, etc). >> > >> > So, even if it's not optimal, the pom looks overall good. >> > >> > I think it makes sense to move forward on the release as it is >> > right now. >> > >> > If there's no objection, I will start the release process >> during the >> > week end. >> > >> > By the way, it would be good to verify that the Maven build is >> still >> > working. Ismaël and I fixed new issues on the Maven build. >> > At some point, after the 2.5.0 release, we have to state to >> > remove the >> > Maven build (after a vote ;)). >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Regards >> > JB >> > >> > >> > On 25/05/2018 01:34, Lukasz Cwik wrote: >> > > The license inclusion issue that was brought up on the thread >> > has been >> > > resolved https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-4393 >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-4393>. >> > > >> > > JB, you find any other release related issues? >> > > >> > > On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:33 AM Lukasz Cwik < >> [email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]> >> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: >> > > >> > > I believe JB is referring >> > > to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-4060 >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-4060> >> > > >> > > On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:16 AM Scott Wegner >> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > J.B., can you give any context on what metadata is >> > missing? Is >> > > there a JIRA? >> > > >> > > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 9:30 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > The build was OK yesterday but the maven-metadata >> > is still >> > > missing. >> > > >> > > That's the point to fix before being able to move >> > forward >> > > on the release. >> > > >> > > I gonna tackle this later today. >> > > >> > > Regards >> > > JB >> > > >> > > On 05/18/2018 02:41 AM, Ahmet Altay wrote: >> > > > Hi JB and all, >> > > > >> > > > I wanted to follow up on my previous email. The >> > python >> > > streaming issue I >> > > > mentioned is resolved and removed from the >> > blocker list. >> > > Blocker list is empty >> > > > now. You can go ahead with the release branch >> > cut when you >> > > are ready. >> > > > >> > > > Thank you, >> > > > Ahmet >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 8:43 AM, Jean-Baptiste >> > Onofré >> > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> > > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected] >> > >> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Hi guys, >> > > > >> > > > just to let you know that the build fully >> > passed on my >> > > box. >> > > > >> > > > I'm testing the artifacts right now. >> > > > >> > > > Regards >> > > > JB >> > > > >> > > > On 06/04/2018 10:48, Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Hi guys, >> > > > >> > > > Apache Beam 2.4.0 has been released on >> > March 20th. >> > > > >> > > > According to our cycle of release >> (roughly 6 >> > > weeks), we should think >> > > > about 2.5.0. >> > > > >> > > > I'm volunteer to tackle this release. >> > > > >> > > > I'm proposing the following items: >> > > > >> > > > 1. We start the Jira triage now, up to >> > Tuesday >> > > > 2. I would like to cut the release on >> > Tuesday >> > > night (Europe time) >> > > > 2bis. I think it's wiser to still use >> > Maven for >> > > this release. Do you >> > > > think we >> > > > will be ready to try a release with >> Gradle ? >> > > > >> > > > After this release, I would like a >> > discussion about: >> > > > 1. Gradle release (if we release 2.5.0 >> > with Maven) >> > > > 2. Isolate release cycle per Beam part. >> > I think it >> > > would be interesting >> > > > to have >> > > > different release cycle: SDKs, DSLs, >> > Runners, IOs. >> > > That's another >> > > > discussion, I >> > > > will start a thread about that. >> > > > >> > > > Thoughts ? >> > > > >> > > > Regards >> > > > JB >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> > > http://blog.nanthrax.net >> > > Talend - http://www.talend.com >> > > >> > >> > -- >> > -- >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > http://blog.nanthrax.net >> > Talend - http://www.talend.com >> > >> > >> >> -- >> -- >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> [email protected] >> http://blog.nanthrax.net >> Talend - http://www.talend.com >> > >
