Il giorno ven 17 dic 2021 alle ore 09:45 Yu <li...@apache.org> ha scritto:
> Hi Enrico, > > Thanks for your great effort on the 2.9.0 release. > > Circling back to see if there is any progress of the 2.9.0 website updates > [1]. > > Currently, the 2.9.0 doc is not available on the website and the 2.9.0 doc > set has not been generated yet, any updates? Thanks > I will do it together with 2.9.1 because 2.9.0 is broken, so it is better to not do much buzz around it Enrico > > [1] > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Release-process#16-update-the-site > > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 3:32 PM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Dave, > > You are correct. > > Pulsar 2.9.0 has already been released and also some people already > started > > to report issues. > > The docker images have been deployed and we cannot change them. > > > > I am finishing the release process for 2.9.0 with the website updates. > > > > I am preparing 2.9.1. > > > > I propose to just skip the announcement for 2.9.0. > > > > If we are quick during the VOTE we can close this story within the end of > > the week > > > > Enrico > > > > Il Lun 13 Dic 2021, 06:34 Dave Fisher <wave4d...@comcast.net> ha > scritto: > > > > > (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 > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > >
