It¹s looks like the release notes (<https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310843 &version=12334255>) only have information about times that were fixed.
Is there a mechanism in rel notes to note important things that didn¹t make it? For example, HIVE-13974? Eugene On 6/21/16, 10:40 AM, "Jesus Camacho Rodriguez" <jcamachorodrig...@hortonworks.com> wrote: >Yes Thejas, I think it makes sense. It would be good to know if want to >remove >the RC tags to update it all together. > >Further, I wonder if we should move all the tag releases to rel/*. I can >do >that too. > >-- > >Jesús > > > >On 6/21/16, 10:35 AM, "Thejas Nair" <thejas.n...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>Jesus, >>Should we update the how-to-release page with steps suggested by Owen ? >>Thanks, >>Thejas >> >> >>On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez >><jcamachorodrig...@hortonworks.com> wrote: >>> Thanks for pointing that out Owen, it is done now. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 6/21/16, 7:08 AM, "Owen O'Malley" <omal...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>>>According to Apache Infra, we should be creating our release tags in >>>>the >>>>rel/* space. Tags with names that start with "rel/" can never be >>>>changed >>>>once they are pushed to Apache, so be careful. *smile* But having a >>>>unmodifiable tag is good to make sure that no one is tempted to "fix" a >>>>release. >>>> >>>>Can you please recreate the tag with the name "rel/release-2.1.0". I'd >>>>also >>>>suggest that you sign the tag with your GPG key with "git tag -s >>>>rel/release-2.1.0 <commit=id>" >>>> >>>>Thanks, >>>> Owen >>>> >>>>On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez < >>>>jcamachorodrig...@hortonworks.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks to everyone who has tested the release candidate and given >>>>> their comments and votes. >>>>> >>>>> The tally is as follows. >>>>> >>>>> 4 +1s: >>>>> Prasanth Jayachandran >>>>> Gunther Hagleitner >>>>> Sushanth Sowmyan >>>>> Jason Dere >>>>> >>>>> No 0s or -1s. >>>>> >>>>> Therefore I am delighted to announce that the proposal to release >>>>> Apache Hive 2.1.0 has passed! We'll now roll the release out to the >>>>> mirrors. >>>>> >>>>> In addition, I have created HIVE-14059 to fix the issue with the >>>>> missing headers for the 2 files (thanks for catching that one >>>>> Sushanth). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 6/17/16, 3:54 PM, "Jason Dere" <jd...@hortonworks.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >Checked signatures, ran build and a few tests. >>>>> >+1 >>>>> >________________________________________ >>>>> >From: Sushanth Sowmyan <khorg...@gmail.com> >>>>> >Sent: Friday, June 17, 2016 3:30 PM >>>>> >To: dev@hive.apache.org >>>>> >Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Hive 2.1.0 Release Candidate 3 >>>>> > >>>>> >Actually, to be more explicit, per Thejas' case of the top level >>>>> >license taking precedence, this RC has my +1. >>>>> > >>>>> >On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Sushanth Sowmyan >>>>><khorg...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >> I will happily rescind my -1 and even convert it to a +1 if the >>>>>top >>>>> >> level license does hold. I thought that the RAT check was a >>>>>necessary >>>>> >> blocker. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> (Although, if the top level license does cover across the board, >>>>>we >>>>> >> may want to open a new discussion on whether having a license >>>>> >> requirement for every source file is necessary in the first >>>>>place, and >>>>> >> tweak the definition of the rat check so it does not fail it in >>>>>this >>>>> >> case.) >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Thejas Nair >>>>><thejas.n...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>> I don't think the missing headers for 2 files mandates a respin >>>>>of >>>>> >>> this RC . It is not really a case of 'incompatible' license or >>>>>code >>>>> >>> that shouldn't be shipped. >>>>> >>> We have a top level license file that covers the entire project, >>>>> >>> including these files. >>>>> >>> IMO, We should fix it if there is a new RC for some other >>>>>reason. But >>>>> >>> this alone doesn't seem to make new RC necessary. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Sushanth, Can you please reconsider your -1 ? >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Sushanth Sowmyan >>>>><khorg...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>> -1, terribly sorry I didn't check for this earlier, but the RAT >>>>>check >>>>> >>>> fails for this. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> If you run mvn apache-rat:check , then you see the following >>>>>issue: >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Unapproved licenses: >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>/Users/sush/t/rel/apache-hive-2.1.0-src/common/src/java/org/apache/hiv >>>>>e/common/util/DateParser.java >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>/Users/sush/t/rel/apache-hive-2.1.0-src/common/src/test/org/apache/hiv >>>>>e/common/util/TestDateParser.java >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Basically, these two files are missing the apache license >>>>>header. We >>>>> >>>> need to add them in. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> All other things are good, though. It has the oracle fix I >>>>>asked for >>>>> >>>> in RC2, md5s and signatures check out, compilation works on >>>>>source >>>>> >>>> package, and I'm able to run the hive binary from the binary >>>>>package. >>>>> >>>> I also tried a number of tests, and I've run a rat test on the >>>>>release >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Jesus Camacho Rodriguez >>>>> >>>> <jcamachorodrig...@hortonworks.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Apache Hive 2.1.0 Release Candidate 3 is available here: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://people.apache.org/~jcamacho/hive-2.1.0-rc3 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Maven artifacts are available here: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehive-1057/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Source tag for RC3 is at: >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/apache/hive/releases/tag/release-2.1.0-rc3 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Voting will conclude in 72 hours. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hive PMC Members: Please test and vote. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> >>
