Hi Dave, Thank you for helping to bring us into compliance on these procedures.
> I suggest that we delete https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS > and only use the official > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/pulsar/KEYS in all cases. We will > need to rewrite our release docs. It seems easier to have a single KEYS file. Regarding 2, I think we're missing the python client distribution. It is currently hosted and distributed via pypi: https://pypi.org/project/pulsar-client. Is it supposed to be hosted https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/pulsar/ as well? > 3. Pulsar 2.7.4 was removed from the Release distribution on January 20, > 2022. Did we announce the EOL of 2.7.x? I don’t recall, but it’s easy to miss > activity. Release line 2.7 has not been declared EOL. That is worth a separate discussion. Our current PIP 47 indicates that it could (should?) be EOL since it was released in December 2020 and has had 4 patch releases. We started a 2.7.5 release, but it stopped with a single failed RC (see https://lists.apache.org/thread/j7y82x98x3zlo1m5b1lc7ljy54p8zl8v). > 4. If the Apache Pulsar Helm Chart and Apache Pulsar Docker Images are > intended to be official convenience releases then they must be included into > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/pulsar/. I agree that we should host them here. > a) The Helm Chart is not under any ASF process and there needs to be a whole > separate discussion about properly handling it. I started research on a release process for the helm chart a couple weeks ago, and distributing it via https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/pulsar/ will be easy to implement, but I haven't had a chance to work through all of the changes yet. We currently host the index.yaml file on the Pulsar website (https://pulsar.apache.org/charts/index.yaml), and that index points helm to download the actual helm chart tarballs from github, as you can see in the index.yaml. Here is our documentation on adding the helm repo (https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/#add-to-local-helm-repository). This essentially points helm to the index.yaml, which helm uses to discover dependencies. Given that we have the general downloads page on the pulsar website, I think it seems to leave this index.yaml on the pulsar website. > b) What is the deal with the docker images? What is the current process? Why > can’t we add them in the release repository where anyone can downstream them > to a convenient location. The current process is to build the docker images on a committer's machine, and then push it to docker hub. The `apachepulsar` DockerHub account has a limited number of accounts, so only certain committers can push to the repo. As an alternative to hosting the image in the release repository, I wonder why we don't distribute our docker images via the Apache repo: https://hub.docker.com/u/apache. That repo is a member of the Docker OSS Program (https://www.docker.com/community/open-source/application/). The program removes the Docker Hub rate limiting on downloads, which could be a great win for our users. The Apache Bookkeeper docker image is already stored in the apache repo (https://hub.docker.com/r/apache/bookkeeper). Thanks, Michael On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 2:04 PM Dave Fisher <w...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hi - > > We need to tighten up our procedures around releases. There are several > issues. > > 1. Maintaining the official KEYS file - > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/pulsar/KEYS > > During the pulsar-manager-0.3.0 release the KEYS were not updated from > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS This was flagged by ASF > Infra and I’ve updated the KEYS file to contain both urfree’s and > mattisonchao’s keys. (We should be good for 2.9.3) > > I suggest that we delete https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS > and only use the official > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/pulsar/KEYS in all cases. We will > need to rewrite our release docs. > > 2, We often leave old releases in the distribution directory. I’ve cleaned > these up, but we need to make sure that this is documented for everything > that is officially released. > > ./pulsar-client-node/pulsar-client-node-1.6.2 > ./pulsar-2.10.1 > ./pulsar-2.10.1/connectors > ./pulsar-2.10.1/RPMS > ./pulsar-2.10.1/RPMS/repodata > ./pulsar-2.10.1/DEB > ./pulsar-2.9.2 > ./pulsar-2.9.2/connectors > ./pulsar-2.9.2/RPMS > ./pulsar-2.9.2/RPMS/repodata > ./pulsar-2.9.2/DEB > ./pulsar-adapters-2.8.0 > ./pulsar-client-go-0.8.1 > ./pulsar-manager/pulsar-manager-0.3.0 > ./pulsar-2.8.3 > ./pulsar-2.8.3/connectors > ./pulsar-2.8.3/RPMS > ./pulsar-2.8.3/RPMS/repodata > ./pulsar-2.8.3/DEB > > 3. Pulsar 2.7.4 was removed from the Release distribution on January 20, > 2022. Did we announce the EOL of 2.7.x? I don’t recall, but it’s easy to miss > activity. > > 4. If the Apache Pulsar Helm Chart and Apache Pulsar Docker Images are > intended to be official convenience releases then they must be included into > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/pulsar/. > > a) The Helm Chart is not under any ASF process and there needs to be a whole > separate discussion about properly handling it. > > b) What is the deal with the docker images? What is the current process? Why > can’t we add them in the release repository where anyone can downstream them > to a convenient location. > > All The Best, > Dave
