(1) we have published 2.9.0 at https://downloads.apache.org/pulsar/pulsar-2.9.0/
(2) we have published 2.9.0 artifacts through maven central. They don’t let anyone republish versions. There are no do overs on versions. We simply cannot redo 2.9.0 at this moment. All the best, Dave Sent from my iPhone > On Dec 12, 2021, at 8:49 PM, Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > My take is - if we haven't announced 2.9, I would suggest just redoing the > 2.9.0 release. > > - Sijie > >> On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 6:35 PM Hang Chen <chenh...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> I am a little confused about why we should skip 2.9.0 and not continue >> to release 2.9.0 by including the critical bug fixes. In fact, the >> Pulsar 2.9.0 release is not yet completed. >> >> For users, they will worry about whether the Pulsar release process is >> standardized if we skip 2.9.0. They will also worry about the release >> quality of Apache Pulsar if we have found the critical bugs before it >> is released but not included it into the release version. For Pulsar >> 2.9.0, it couldn't be deployed into the production environment due to >> the critical bug https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12993 >> >> Regards, >> Hang >> >> Dave Fisher <wave4d...@comcast.net> 于2021年12月13日周一 09:40写道： >>> >>> It can be the case that releases are not announced. For example with >> Tomcat a version which fails to pass the vote is skipped. >>> >>> Let’s not announce 2.9.0 and go on to 2.9.1. >>> >>> Maybe there’s some website fixes to hide 2.9.0. >>> >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>>> On Dec 12, 2021, at 5:28 PM, PengHui Li <peng...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Another point is we have not announced the 2.9.0 release yet. >>>> >>>> This will make users feel confused that a new release from the Pulsar >>>> community with the >>>> serious problem(log4j bug) but after the log4j has fixed the issue and >>>> provided the new release. >>>> >>>> I think we'd better contain the fix in 2.9.0 and 2.9.0 also has a >> critical >>>> bug https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12993 >>>> which will lead the topic stop to provide services for more than 5min. >> It >>>> looks like, hey, we have a new release here but >>>> it has critical security issues and known serious bugs which will >> seriously >>>> affect the core features. >>>> >>>> From the perspective of release, yes, the release vote has closed. But >> I >>>> believe that users will not care about this matter, >>>> they only care about the quality of the products we provided. >>>> >>>> I would like to hear your views. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Penghui >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 6:26 PM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I am starting 2.9.1 on Monday >>>>> >>>>> Enrico >>>>> >>>>> Il Dom 12 Dic 2021, 02:19 陳智弘 <thomasec...@gmail.com> ha scritto: >>>>> >>>>>> Totally agree >>>>>> >>>>>>> PengHui Li <peng...@apache.org> 於 2021年12月12日 週日 08:28 寫道： >>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Penghui >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Matteo Merli <mme...@apache.org>于2021年12月11日 周六15:28写道： >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> At this point, if 2.9.0 is non stable, I think we should >> fast-forward >>>>>>>> to 2.9.1 which will include security fix. Though, we should start >>>>>>>> 2.9.1 right now. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Matteo Merli >>>>>>>> <mme...@apache.org> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 11:23 PM Michael Marshall < >>>>>> mmarsh...@apache.org> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> +1 - thanks Enrico. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - Michael >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 1:11 AM Lari Hotari <lhot...@apache.org> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> la 11. jouluk. 2021 klo 9.07 Enrico Olivelli < >>>>> eolive...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> kirjoitti: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hello folks, >>>>>>>>>>> Yesterday we committed the release notes for 2.9.0. >>>>>>>>>>> I just have to publish a couple of other artifacts and update >>>>> the >>>>>>>> website >>>>>>>>>>> before announcing 2.9.0. >>>>>>>>>>> My plan is to complete the procedure next week. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In the meantime, early next week, I believe it is time to >>>>> prepare >>>>>>>> the first >>>>>>>>>>> RC of 2.9.1, due to the log4j bug. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If you are aware of problems on branch-2.9 or things to be >>>>>>>> cherry-picked >>>>>>>>>>> because they are blocker please let me know. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Otherwise if branch-2.9 is stable I will cut the RC from what >>>>> we >>>>>>>> already >>>>>>>>>>> have now. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I am volunteering as RM for 2.9.1 as I followed 2.9.0 and >>>>> release >>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>> basically non stable due to the bugs we discovered after >>>>>> completing >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> VOTE and publishing the artifacts to dockerhub and Maven >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Best regards >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Enrico >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >>
