The vote time is over, but I'll keep it open for a bit longer until we've decided regarding Till's issue.
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Till, > good catch! That is definitively a severe issue. Probably it didn't > surface yet, because > a) the code example in the documentation is using a new instance for each > state descriptor > b) people are using stateless serializers? > c) don't have the same state descriptor on the same machine > > I see two options how to handle the situation > 1) Cancel RC3 and do another vote (potentially with a 24 hrs vote time) > 2) Release RC3 as 1.3.0 and start the vote for 1.3.1 right afterwards. > > > + Pros and - cons for cancelling RC3 > - The release would be delayed (not sure who's expecting the 1.3.0 to be > available on time) > - The bug has been there since many releases, probably no user is affected > and it was not introduced during the rel 1.3.0 cycle. > - There is a workaround for the issue > + We would have a better feeling for the 1.3.0 release because there are > no known critical issues. > > + pro and - cons for releasing RC3: > + there are some other "minor" issues that showed up during the 1.3.0 > testing that could go into 1.3.1 (FLINK-6763 > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6763>, FLINK-6764 > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6764>) without too much > time-pressure (I'm happy to manage the 1.3.1 release and start it tomorrow) > > > I'm undecided between both options and more than happy to hear your > opinion. > > > > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> I might have found a blocking issue [1]. The problem is that a >> StateDescriptor cannot be shared by multiple subtasks because they don't >> duplicate their serializer. As a consequence, things break if you have a >> stateful serializer. The problem exists since 1.0. However, given that >> this >> issue is really hard to debug for the user and one can easily fall into >> this trap, I would like to fix it for the release. >> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6775 >> >> Cheers, >> Till >> >> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: >> >> > +1 (binding) >> > >> > - verified source and binary signatures >> > - verified source and binary checksums >> > - verified LICENSEs >> > - verified NOTICEs >> > - built from source >> > >> > Greg >> > >> > >> > > On May 26, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi all, >> > > >> > > this is the second VOTEing release candidate for Flink 1.3.0 >> > > >> > > The commit to be voted on: >> > > 760eea8a <http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/flink/commit/760eea8 >> a> >> > > (*http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/flink/commit/760eea8a >> > > <http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/flink/commit/760eea8a>*) >> > > >> > > Branch: >> > > release-1.3.0-rc3 >> > > >> > > The release artifacts to be voted on can be found at: >> > > http://people.apache.org/~rmetzger/flink-1.3.0-rc3 >> > > >> > > >> > > The release artifacts are signed with the key with fingerprint >> D9839159: >> > > http://www.apache.org/dist/flink/KEYS >> > > >> > > The staging repository for this release can be found at: >> > > *https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapach >> eflink-1122 >> > > <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapach >> eflink-1122 >> > >* >> > > >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > >> > > >> > > The vote ends on Tuesday (May 30th), 7pm CET. >> > > >> > > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Flink 1.3.0 >> > > [ ] -1 Do not release this package, because ... >> > >> > >> > >
