I would also be in favor of continuing the RC, if we find nothing more problematic
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> wrote: > Thanks for the RC. The documentation version is a really minor issue > which most people won't even notice because they use the online > documentation. I wouldn't create a new RC just for fixing that. > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> On 05 Feb 2016, at 12:17, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> I compared the RC1 branch to the release-0.10.2 tag and went over the > diff > >> (less than 2k changed lines, mostly added tests). > >> > >> Issues: > >> - the docs/_config.yml needs to be updated to version 0.10.2 > >> > >> Added / changed dependencies in pom files: > >> - Kryo was added to flink-storm > >> - ASM was added to flink-gelly-scala > >> - zkclient was added to flink-connector-kafka > >> - Netty was downgraded to version 4.0.27.Final in the root pom.xml > >> > >> All of these dependencies changes are fine because we had dependencies > on > >> these artifacts already. > >> I did not see any added dependencies (web stuff, etc). > >> > >> -1 for the RC due to the non-updated docs config. However, I'd suggest > to > >> continue testing this RC before creating a new one. > > > > We had this issue before with the docs. I would actually like to not > block the release on this, because the docs on the website are updated from > the 0.10 release branch anyways and this will only affect people who check > out the docs locally. > > > > If you insist or other people see this as a blocker as well, I can > certainly create another RC. > > > > – Ufuk > > > > PS: I’ve added a note to the releasing Wiki entry. > > >
