Thanks for bringing up the projects and the record API: - Concerning the projects: Nice to have, but not critical, unless we want to change the names of the Maven artifacts. I would rather not rush this
- Removal of Record API. Good thing to have, but should not be a release blocker. I would be fine with doing this for 1.0 On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hmm, it took IntelliJ some time to figure out all the consequences of > removing the Record API. > Seems to be more than I initially expected. > > @Chesnay, do you want to help? I would push my current version to my > repository and you could take over some packages and fix the tests. Just > reply to me directly to coordinate. Thanks. > > 2015-10-22 16:45 GMT+02:00 Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com>: > > > I just deleted the Record API to check what would break. > > Doesn't look too scary, just a few tests that need to be adapted. I'm > > right in the middle of that. Hope to open a PR soon. > > > > 2015-10-22 16:42 GMT+02:00 Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>: > > > >> @RecordAPI: Yes, i was curious where we are at regarding the removal of > >> the Record API. > >> If there are still tests left to port (or other related things) I'd be > >> more than happy to do it (got a /lot/ of free time on my hands). > >> The related JIRA issues weren't particularly helpful though in figuring > >> out what still needs to be done. > >> > >> @Project Restructuring: I prefer doing it now. > >> > >> > >> On 22.10.2015 15:54, Till Rohrmann wrote: > >> > >>> This reminded me that at some point we wanted to remove the old record > >>> API ( > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1681). I think that > Chesnay > >>> checked with Henry on this topic in JIRA. > >>> > >>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> I'd like to bring up Vasia's question on the project structure. > >>>> > >>>> Stephan started the discussion and proposed a new project structure > >>>> about > >>>> three weeks ago [1]. > >>>> The proposal was refined a bit and eventually backed by many +1s. > >>>> > >>>> Do we want to make this happen in 0.10 or do we postpone it after the > >>>> release? > >>>> > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Fabian > >>>> > >>>> [1][ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/flink-dev/201510.mbox/%3CCANC1h_u6qtEsF1WCcoU1d38JGd%2BXTAQWmvp9Stx4vfe68BOjBw%40mail.gmail.com%3E > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> 2015-10-22 15:10 GMT+02:00 Suneel Marthi <smar...@apache.org>: > >>>> > >>>> We r actually targeting Flink 0.10, since 0.10 would be out by the > time > >>>>> > >>>> we > >>>> > >>>>> have Flink-Mahout integration in place. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org > > > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Forget my last mail. Just found out that the Mahout guys are still > >>>>>> > >>>>> running > >>>>> > >>>>>> on 0.9-SNAPSHOT. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Till Rohrmann < > trohrm...@apache.org> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I found another issue (FLINK-2894 > >>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-2894>) while helping > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> the > >>>> > >>>>> mahout guys with the flink bindings for Samsara. Currently we don't > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> allow > >>>>> > >>>>>> to register default serializer for Kryo. This means it is not > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> possible > >>>> > >>>>> to > >>>>> > >>>>>> specify a serializer for a base class and all its subclasses. In > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> order > >>>> > >>>>> to > >>>>> > >>>>>> push the flink integration with Samsara, I would like to include a > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> fix > >>>> > >>>>> for > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> it in 0.10. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Sachin Goel < > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> sachingoel0...@gmail.com > >>>> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Oct 22, 2015 3:01 PM, "Maximilian Michels" <m...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> @Stephan: That's right, the detached mode is very useful for > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> streaming > >>>>> > >>>>>> programs. Let's see if we can merge Sachin's pull request to give > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> more > >>>>> > >>>>>> meaningful exceptions in case of user programs which are not > >>>>>>>>> compatible with the detached execution mode. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I'll leave it up to you guys to make a decision on it then. But > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> something > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> needs to be done about it. :') > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> @Vasia: That's a feature :) You can adjust the number of old jobs > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> to > >>>> > >>>>> be kept by setting 'jobmanager.web.history' (default is 5). > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Vasiliki Kalavri > >>>>>>>>> <vasilikikala...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I found an issue with the web interface. It only shows the last > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> 5 > >>>> > >>>>> finished > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> jobs and the "Jobs Finished" counter also goes up to 5. > >>>>>>>>>> I found FLINK-2206, but it seems that this was fixed for the old > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> interface > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> and broken again in the new one? > >>>>>>>>>> Shall I open another issue or is there something I need to > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> configure > >>>>> > >>>>>> in > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> new web interface and I haven't? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>>> -V. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On 22 October 2015 at 11:20, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> I am onto FLINK-2800 and FLINK-2888 > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I would not disable YARN detached mode, it is used quite a bit > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> by > >>>> > >>>>> streaming > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> users and makes perfect sense for streaming jobs, which are > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> always > >>>>> > >>>>>> one-shot > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> currently. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Maximilian Michels < > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> m...@apache.org > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I had a gut feeling this wouldn't be the last RC :) > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I second Stephan, Ufuk, and Fabian. It's a good idea to start > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> testing the > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> release candidate. We might discover more issues on the way. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> In > >>>> > >>>>> the > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> meantime, let's fix FLINK-2763 and FLINK-2800 and push those > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>> > >>>>> the > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> release-0.10 branch. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Eager execution calls are not supported by the detached YARN > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> execution > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> mode. The Flink standalone cluster mode doesn't have a > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> detached > >>>> > >>>>> mode. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Sachin was working on throwing a proper exception for > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> programs > >>>> > >>>>> that > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> try > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> submit a job which contains eager execution calls. In the > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> course > >>>>> > >>>>>> of > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> throwing a proper exception, he also added detached execution > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> mode > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> support > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> for the standalone cluster mode. The reason why eager > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> execution > >>>> > >>>>> doesn't > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> work with detached programs is that the client submits the > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> first > >>>>> > >>>>>> Flink > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> job > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> (call to execute/count/collect/print) to the cluster and then > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> returns an > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> empty ExecutionResult. This leads to error if the user > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> program > >>>> > >>>>> tries > >>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> access the ExecutionResult. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Sachin's pull request hasn't been merged in time for the > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> release. I > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> would > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> like Flink to support detached execution mode but I suggest > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>> > >>>>> disable > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> detached execution mode for YARN in this release. We can > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> include > >>>>> > >>>>>> a > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> proper > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> support for the next release. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Sachin Goel < > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> sachingoel0...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Not sure if it's a blocker, but the yarn detached mode is > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> faulty > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> interactive programs with eager execution calls. The most > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> basic > >>>>> > >>>>>> starting > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> point for yarn, i.e. *bin/flink run -m yarn-cluster -yd -n > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> <> > >>>> > >>>>> examples/Wordcount.jar* fails in a bad way. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Sachin Goel > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Computer Science, IIT Delhi > >>>>>>>>>>>>> m. +91-9871457685 > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 3:57 AM, fhueske < > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> fhue...@gmail.com> > >>>> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> +1 to that, Stephan. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can help with FLINK-2763 or FLINK-2800. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Stephan Ewen > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 0:02 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: dev@flink.apache.org > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flink 0.10.0 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> (release-0.10.0-rc0) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> From my side 2888 is a valid blocker. Aljoscha also found > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> another > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> blocker > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> bug, so this RC will need a few patches. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think for 2824 there was no consensus to what would > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> actually > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> be the > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> desired behavior, which makes it a bad candidate for a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> blocker. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I would try and fix FLINK-2763 and FLINK-2800 if > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> possible, > >>>> > >>>>> but > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> not > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> block > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the release on that. They seem to be very corner case. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Good > >>>> > >>>>> to > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> fix > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> them, > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> but not blockers. Too many people are on the 0.10 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> SNAPSHOT > >>>> > >>>>> right > >>>>>>>> now > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> too many urgent fixes are in that people wait to be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> available > >>>>> > >>>>>> in > >>>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> release. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about we start testing anyways, because I would > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> expect > >>>> > >>>>> us > >>>>> > >>>>>> to > >>>>>>>> find > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> more > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues, and we save time if we do not create a new > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> release > >>>> > >>>>> candidate > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> each patch. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Flavio Pompermaier < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> pomperma...@okkam.it > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would also point out that Flink-2763 and Flink-2800 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> could > >>>>> > >>>>>> be > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> worth > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> further investigations before this release > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Flavio > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 21 Oct 2015 23:33, "Gyula Fóra" <gyf...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Thanks Max for the effort, this is going to be huge > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :) > >>>> > >>>>> Unfortunately I have to say -1 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-2888 and FLINK-2824 are blockers from my point > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > >>>> > >>>>> view. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gyula > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vasiliki Kalavri <vasilikikala...@gmail.com> ezt > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> írta > >>>> > >>>>> (időpont: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> 2015. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> okt. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 21., Sze, 20:07): > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Awesome! Thanks Max :)) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a couple of questions: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - what about the blocker issue (according to the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wiki) > >>>>> > >>>>>> FLINK-2747? > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - weren't we going to get rid of staging > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> altogether? > >>>> > >>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -V. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 21 October 2015 at 19:54, Stephan Ewen < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> se...@apache.org > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Super, thanks Max! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We should also bump the master to the next > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version > >>>> > >>>>> then, > >>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> separate > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> goes into release fixes and what goes into the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next > >>>> > >>>>> version... > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Is that going to be 1.0-SNAPSHOT? ;-) That is a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separate > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> thread, > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> guess... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 7:12 PM, Maximilian > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michels < > >>>>> > >>>>>> m...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Release candidates have to be tested > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thoroughly. > >>>> > >>>>> Therefore, I > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> would > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everybody to take a look at the release page in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>> > >>>>>> wiki: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/0.10+Release > >>>> > >>>>> I've compiled the checks into a document. I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would > >>>> > >>>>> like > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> everyone > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assign > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one of the checks in the documents to test the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> candidate: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TWCFj55xTyJjGYe8x9YEqmICgSvcexDPlbgP4CnLpLY/edit?usp=sharing > >>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 7:10 PM, Maximilian > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michels < > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> m...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear community, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The past months we have been working very > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hard > >>>> > >>>>> to > >>>>> > >>>>>> push > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> towards > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0.10. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would like to propose the first release > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> candidate. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> =================================== > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please vote on releasing the following > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> candidate > >>>>> > >>>>>> as > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Apache > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Flink > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0.10.0: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The commit to be voted on: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> b697064b71b97e51703caae13660038949d41631 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Branch: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release-0.10.0-rc0 (see > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf/flink/?p=flink.git > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ) > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release artifacts to be voted on can be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> found > >>>>> > >>>>>> at: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~mxm/flink-0.10.0-rc0/ > >>>>> > >>>>>> Release artifacts are signed with the key > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with > >>>> > >>>>> fingerprint > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> C2909CBF: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/flink/KEYS > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository for this release can > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > >>>> > >>>>> found > >>>>>>>> at: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheflink-1047 > >>>>> > >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apache > >>>> > >>>>> Flink > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> 0.10.0. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> The vote is open for the next 72 hours and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> passes > >>>>> > >>>>>> if > >>>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> majority > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> least three +1 PMC votes are cast. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The vote ends on Monday October 26, 2015. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Flink > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0.10.0 > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... > >>>> > >>>>> =================================== > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > > >
