I did the original notice file update, I will update. Some of these dependencies might not be needed actually.
- Sijie On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Ivan Kelly <iv...@apache.org> wrote: > -1 from me unfortunately. > > There are a lot of files in lib/ the bookkeeper-all which aren't > covered in the notice: > com.google.code.findbugs-jsr305-3.0.2.jar > com.google.errorprone-error_prone_annotations-2.1.2.jar > com.twitter-jsr166e-1.0.0.jar > com.twitter-libthrift-0.5.0-7.jar > com.twitter-libthrift-0.5.0-7.jar > com.twitter-scrooge-core_2.11-4.16.0.jar > com.twitter-twitter-server_2.11-1.29.0.jar > javax.inject-javax.inject-1.jar > javax.servlet-javax.servlet-api-3.1.0.jar > > Bookkeeper-server notice doesn't cover: > com.google.code.findbugs-jsr305-3.0.2.jar > com.google.errorprone-error_prone_annotations-2.1.2.jar > javax.servlet-javax.servlet-api-3.1.0.jar > > Don't use the lists above as a basis to fix though. Whoever is > updating should doublecheck that the NOTICE files cover everything in > lib. We're going to need a different NOTICE for bookkeeper-server and > bookkeeper-all also. It's probably worth getting maven to try and > generate these files for us. > Otherwise everything looks good. > 1. checksums and signature checked out > 2. findbugs, rat, and tests ran cleanly > 3. Jepsen tests passed > > The other thing that's needed for the next RC is that the breaks in > the API (around thrown exceptions), need to be noted clearly and > loudly in the release notes. > > Best regards, > Ivan > > > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 4:54 AM, Jia Zhai <zhaiji...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks a lot Enrico for the verification, especially for the notes. Would > > you please also help open some issues on github to track your findings > and > > suggestions? > > > > On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> +1 (non binding) > >> looks good to me > >> > >> - Built and tested candidate source tar ball > >> - Run Bookie and basic Bookie shel commands from the "dist all" package > >> - Checked tag on GitHub > >> - All tests are passing on my downstream projects (some of them need > >> re-compiling or minor changes) > >> > >> Thank you Jia for driving this and to every body, I expect great > >> improvements in production > >> > >> Notes: > >> > >> 1) There is a failing test on my dev machine, even on master. I think > this > >> is not blocker for the release. It must be some problem on my machine: > >> > >> testWithDiskFullAndAbilityToCreateNewIndexFile(org.apache. > >> bookkeeper.bookie.BookieInitializationTest) > >> Time elapsed: 12.871 sec <<< FAILURE! > >> java.lang.AssertionError: Bookie should be up and running > >> at > >> org.apache.bookkeeper.bookie.BookieInitializationTest. > >> testWithDiskFullAndAbilityToCreateNewIndexFile( > >> BookieInitializationTest.java:602) > >> > >> > >> 2) NOTICE reports very old copyright note (dates to 2015) -> we should > >> check this on every file, not just this one, it is not a problem I think > >> > >> 3) EnsemblePlacementPolicy changed signatures of methods -> compile time > >> issue on downstream projects, I already knew, not a problem. I will not > >> create any issue. > >> > >> 4) BookKeeper.Builder#build -> now throws BKException -> compile time > issue > >> on downstream projects, but it is not a showstopper. I wlil not create > any > >> issue. This was expected. > >> > >> 5) Dropped dependency on commons collections -> so this disappeared from > >> downstream projects -> it is not a real problem, downstream project must > >> explicitly declare their own dependencies, it is not a BK problem. > >> > >> 6) We have better "BKException#getMessage", this has some impact on test > >> cases of downstream projects -> it is not a problem, I consider this a > bug > >> on downstream projects, testcases should be more robust as BK provides > >> typed Exceptions > >> > >> Enrico > >> > >> > >> 2017-12-05 6:19 GMT+01:00 Jia Zhai <zhai...@apache.org>: > >> > >> > Hi everyone, > >> > > >> > Please review and vote on the release candidate #0 for the version > >> > 4.6.0, as follows: > >> > [ ] +1, Approve the release > >> > [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments) > >> > > >> > The complete staging area is available for your review, which > includes: > >> > * Release notes [1] > >> > * The official Apache source and binary distributions to be deployed > >> > to dist.apache.org [2] > >> > * All artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [3] > >> > * Source code tag "release-4.6.0" [4] > >> > > >> > BookKeeper's KEYS file contains PGP keys we used to sign this > >> > release:https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/bookkeeper/KEYS > >> > > >> > Please download these packages and review this release candidate: > >> > > >> > - Review release notes > >> > - Download the source package (verify md5, shasum, and asc) and follow > >> the > >> > instructions to build and run the bookkeeper service. > >> > - Download the binary package (verify md5, shasum, and asc) and follow > >> the > >> > instructions to run the bookkeeper service. > >> > - Review maven repo, release tag, licenses, and any other things you > >> think > >> > it is important to a release. > >> > > >> > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority > >> > approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes. > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Jia Zhai > >> > > >> > [1] *https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/759 > >> > <https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/759>* > >> > [2] *https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/bookkeeper/ > >> > bookkeeper-4.6.0-rc0/ > >> > <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/bookkeeper/bookkeepe > r-4.6.0-rc0/ > >> >* > >> > [3] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ > >> > orgapachebookkeeper-1021/ > >> > [4] https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/tree/release-4.6.0 > >> > > >> >
