Yes -- it's a shame I don't remember it. The 2.0.0 release was just 6
months ago!


> The commit you linked goes on master after the release is completed
> because it needs a docker image to pull. This step happens towards the end
> of the release manager guide:
>
> https://ozone-site-v2.staged.apache.org/docs/developer-guide/project/release-guide#update-acceptance-tests-on-the-master-branch
>
> Ethan
>
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 1:53 PM Wei-Chiu Chuang <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > We need to test the upgrade path
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/ozone/blob/560fcdf90c04501b621b79339764a3585a4293e3/hadoop-ozone/dist/src/main/compose/upgrade/test.sh#L36
> >
> > Similar to what we did with Ozone 2.0:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/ozone/commit/560fcdf90c04501b621b79339764a3585a4293e3
> >
> > Related:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-13908 the Snapshot Bootstrap
> > project changed checkpoint endpoint and could destabilize the
> > upgrade/compatibility. I am reverting the change so it's okay, but we
> still
> > need to run the upgrade test from 2.0 to 2.1 (and 1.4.1 to 2.1 too)
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 1:48 PM Chung En Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Ozone community. Here's the RC1:
> > >
> > > Git tag: https://github.com/apache/ozone/releases/tag/ozone-2.1.0-RC1
> > >
> > > Resolved jiras:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-13799?jql=project%20%3D%20HDDS%20AND%20status%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.1.0
> > >
> > >
> > > Source code and binary tarball:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ozone/2.1.0-rc1//
> > > Maven artifacts:
> > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheozone-1037/
> > > Key: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/ozone/KEYS
> Fingerprint:
> > > 02192AAA4CA0DF7D
> > >
> > > RC1 and RC2 diff:
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/ozone/compare/ozone-2.1.0-RC0...ozone-2.1.0-RC1
> > > <
> >
> https://github.com/apache/ozone/compare/ozone-2.0.0-RC1...ozone-2.0.0-RC2
> > > >
> > >
> > > Chung-En
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to