+1

Ran checksum, checked license and signature, ran unit tests.
Ran against Hive catalog and S3 with CLI, tested create/load/drop/rename table 
and create/drop/load database.

Best,
Jack Ye

From: Daniel Weeks <dwe...@apache.org>
Reply-To: "dev@iceberg.apache.org" <dev@iceberg.apache.org>
Date: Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 9:37 PM
To: "dev@iceberg.apache.org" <dev@iceberg.apache.org>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL][VOTE] Release Apache PyIceberg 0.1.0 RC2

+1

I checked sigs/sums/license/tests.
I ran through the CLI commands with REST Catalog and a few with Hive Metastore.

Minor issues (non-blockers):
  - Miss configuration with uri / credentials often resulted in confusing 
errors (asking to set the fields which were already supplied).
  - I wasn't able to get the environment variables to work in some cases 
(possibly user error, command line arguments worked fine).

A few minor notes on the verification process:
  - some of the instructions (like gpg check) had RC reference, but that's not 
the binary being checked
  - the license check is a little hard to know if it passed or not.  It would 
be great if it gave a pass/fail at the end

On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 1:01 PM Ryan Blue 
<b...@tabular.io<mailto:b...@tabular.io>> wrote:
Thanks for the clarification, Fokko!

I think it makes sense that I'd get an RC version from what was published as an 
RC on PyPI! Since we will publish a final artifact with the right version and 
none of the files in the release candidate are affected (it's correct in the 
tarball and whl files) then I'll change my vote to +1.

Ryan

On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 12:30 AM Driesprong, Fokko <fo...@driesprong.frl> wrote:
Thanks everyone for giving it a try.

I should have explained the version on PyPI. We need to add the RC postfix to 
the version when we upload it to PyPI for testing. PyPI will extract the 
version from the setup.py, and omitting the RC would mean an actual release. 
The tarball will just contain the version without the RC.

To avoid confusion in the future, I would suggest to hardcode the version 
instead of looking it up from the currently installed version: 
https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/5854 This makes it more clear, the only 
thing is that we need to bump two versions after a release. This is very little 
effort and will reduce the ambiguity around the version. For clarity, I also 
created a PR with the updated release instructions: 
https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/5856

I would suggest a new RC after we decide on #5854

Thanks,
Fokko




Op ma 26 sep. 2022 om 07:30 schreef Steve Zhang 
<hongyue_zh...@apple.com.invalid>:
+0 (non-binding and it’s just version needs to be fixed )

Passing:
Verified LICENSE in the tarball
Checked sha512 sums and signatures
Installed the CLI and ran basic commands with a hive metastore and AWS S3
Ran tests (on Docker python 3.9 image some pyarrow tests failed w/ permission 
issue but in local they are fine)

Issues:
- same version issue as Ryan pointed out

Thanks,
Steve Zhang




On Sep 25, 2022, at 10:37 AM, Ryan Blue 
<b...@tabular.io<mailto:b...@tabular.io>> wrote:


+0

Looks great, except that the version isn’t correct: pyiceberg.__version__ 
returns 0.1.0rc2

Passing:

  *   Verified LICENSE and NOTICE content in the tarball and whl (nit: NOTICE 
and LICENSE are in different directories)
  *   Checked sha512 sums and signatures
  *   Ran RAT checks (nit: the poetry.lock file is not excluded if you create 
it)
  *   Ran tests
  *   Installed the CLI and ran basic commands with a REST metastore

Issues:

  *   pyiceberg.__version__ returns 0.1.0rc2 instead of 0.1.0

On Sat, Sep 24, 2022 at 12:51 PM Driesprong, Fokko 
<fo...@apache.org<mailto:fo...@apache.org>> wrote:
Hi Everyone,

Thanks everyone for giving it a try and for the feedback. Much appreciated! I'm 
canceling RC1 because the version of the package itself was tagged with RC1. 
This doesn't allow us to release the code as is since we would have to remove 
the RC postfix.

Other things to make the release smoother:

  *   Include the Makefile to the source distribution to make the reviewing 
easier (see new commands below).
  *   Include NOTICE to the source distribution.
  *   Include a license checker in the source distribution to easily check the 
licenses.
  *   Fixed the path in the checksum, so we can use shasum -c (see below).
I propose that we release the following RC as the official PyIceberg 0.1.0 
release.

The commit ID is 83e3ab0b9fb57890d63130499e84c55b91fc0c17

  *   This corresponds to the tag: pyiceberg-0.1.0rc2 
(289b4737d772260d7967c028bbb3f9a07e295ea8)
  *   https://github.com/apache/iceberg/releases/tag/pyiceberg-0.1.0rc2
  *   
https://github.com/apache/iceberg/tree/83e3ab0b9fb57890d63130499e84c55b91fc0c17
  *   Difference between RC1 and RC2: 
https://github.com/apache/iceberg/compare/pyiceberg-0.1.0rc1...pyiceberg-0.1.0rc2

The release tarball, signature, and checksums are here: 
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/pyiceberg-0.1.0rc2/

You can find the KEYS file here: 
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/KEYS

You can run the following to check the signature:
> wget https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/KEYS
> gpg --import KEYS
> gpg --verify pyiceberg-0.1.0rc2.tar.gz.asc pyiceberg-0.1.0rc2.tar.gz
gpg: Signature made za 24 sep 21:07:12 2022 CEST
gpg:                using RSA key FCD3779E399C53D995FC82A35171BA3E54493550
gpg: Good signature from "Fokko Driesprong 
<fo...@apache.org<mailto:fo...@apache.org>>" [ultimate]


And check the checksums:
> shasum -c pyiceberg-0.1.0.tar.gz.sha512
pyiceberg-0.1.0.tar.gz: OK

Convenience binary artifacts are staged on pypi: 
https://pypi.org/project/pyiceberg/0.1.0rc2/

And can be installed using: pip3 install pyiceberg==0.1.0rc2

Testing can be done using:

> wget 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/pyiceberg-0.1.0rc2/pyiceberg-0.1.0.tar.gz
> tar -xf pyiceberg-0.1.0.tar.gz
> cd pyiceberg-0.1.0
> make check-license
> make install && make test

Please download, verify, and test.

Please vote in the next 96 hours (extended due to the weekend).
[ ] +1 Release this as PyIceberg 0.1.0
[ ] +0
[ ] -1 Do not release this because...

Please don't hesitate to reach out if there are any questions,

Kind regards,
Fokko


--
Ryan Blue
Tabular



--
Ryan Blue
Tabular

Reply via email to