You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@arrow.apache.org by Neal Richardson <ne...@gmail.com> on 2021/05/12 22:52:21 UTC

[DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Hi,
As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to gauge interest in doing
a 4.0.1 patch release.

There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with 4.0.1 [1]. There are 3
segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised yesterday [2] in
requesting a patch release.

I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my opinion (yet). I will say
that the question is whether someone (or multiple people) wants to step up
and drive a release--if releases were costless, this would be much
different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch release process
(source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this could be a test for
whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us better distribute the
work of producing binary artifacts.

Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be release manager?

Thanks,
Neal


[1]:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
[2]:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com>.
I would suggest Krisztian or someone in the web of trust have a video
call with Jorge to confirm his identity (and GPG fingerprint) and then
commit his code signing key to KEYS. I don't think it's necessary to
be extremely paranoid about this.

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 2:06 PM Neal Richardson
<ne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> How does one get their key in the Web of Trust? We do need to be able to
> add people to that so that it's not just the same handful of individuals
> who can be release manager, and now seems like a great time to add Jorge.
>
> Neal
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:52 AM Krisztián Szűcs <sz...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I think your GPG key hasn't been configured yet, at least it is not in
> > the KEYS file [1].
> > The source release tarball must be signed by the release manager.
> >
> > Do you have an Apache Code Signing key?
> > If not, then it could be better if either Kou or I would be the
> > release manager.
> >
> > [1]: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/arrow/KEYS
> >
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:45 PM Krisztián Szűcs
> > <sz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:30 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks, Krisztián!
> > > >
> > > > I saw that ARROW-12769 and ARROW-12619 were also just cherry-picked,
> > so we
> > > > are 2 to go:
> > > >
> > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> > > Resolved now, but didn't require a patch on our side.
> > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
> > > Just merged it.
> > >
> > > The maintenance branch should be ready now.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Jorge
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 1:42 PM Krisztián Szűcs <
> > szucs.krisztian@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 7:44 AM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have started collecting commits to the maint branch [1]. The
> > exact
> > > > > > commands I used:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > git clone git@github.com:apache/arrow.git
> > > > > > cd arrow/dev
> > > > > > python3 -m venv venv
> > > > > > source venv/bin/activate
> > > > > > pip install -e archery
> > > > > > pip install GitPython jira semver jinja2
> > > > > > archery release cherry-pick 4.0.1
> > > > > > # ran the commands it printed one by one
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is a commit that does not apply cleanly. Could someone from
> > C++
> > > > > merge
> > > > > > it? What to do:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Run `git fetch upstream && git checkout maint-4.0.x && git
> > cherry-pick
> > > > > > ce2861713472818eea264957de4cc83d5a2c567c`
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This will trigger a merge conflict. Resolve and push to
> > maint-4.0.x on
> > > > > > apache/arrow.
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I've recreated the maintenance branch and resolved the conflicts.
> > > > > According to the release curation script [1], we have 4 issues
> > without
> > > > > available patches:
> > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12769 (Joris has just
> > > > > submitted a PR)
> > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12619
> > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]: https://gist.github.com/kszucs/ee55942138caf14845fdecf43edb3ecc
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Jorge
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/maint-4.0.x
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 1:23 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for taking this on. Krisztián can confirm the details (or
> > point
> > > > > you
> > > > > > > to where this is documented), but based on past patch releases, I
> > > > > believe
> > > > > > > you would make a `maint-4.0.x` branch off of the existing
> > > > > `release-4.0.0`
> > > > > > > branch, cherry-pick the commits associated with the JIRAs tagged
> > for
> > > > > 4.0.1
> > > > > > > (I believe there are utility scripts to help with this), and run
> > the
> > > > > > > release script that bumps the versions.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:32 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão <
> > > > > > > jorgecarleitao@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Just to make sure: the goal is to cherry-pick all changes
> > targeted
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > > 4.0.1 into a branch and release from there? If that is the
> > case,
> > > > > then I
> > > > > > > > will create a branch and start cherry-picking the changes in
> > order
> > > > > they
> > > > > > > > were merged in master.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I see 5 issues on the list still open. I subscribed to them
> > and will
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > > cherry-picking them as they get merged.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On the Rust side; we can either bump 4.1.0 or cherry-pick for a
> > > > > 4.0.1. I
> > > > > > > > suggest 4.0.1 to keep parity as we recently agreed, but let me
> > know
> > > > > if
> > > > > > > > others disagree.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/289
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 5:54 PM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks, Jorge!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If anyone else has bugfixes that they'd like included in a
> > patch
> > > > > > > release,
> > > > > > > > > please tag them with the 4.0.1 Fix Version. Perhaps we can
> > do a
> > > > > roundup
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > start a vote early next week?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 8:20 AM Wes McKinney <
> > wesmckinn@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release
> > sounds
> > > > > like a
> > > > > > > > > > good idea to me.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > > > > > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > > > > Jorge
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > > > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to
> > gauge
> > > > > > > interest
> > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > doing
> > > > > > > > > > > > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with
> > 4.0.1 [1].
> > > > > > > There
> > > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > 3
> > > > > > > > > > > > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised
> > > > > yesterday
> > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > > requesting a patch release.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my
> > opinion
> > > > > (yet). I
> > > > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > > > say
> > > > > > > > > > > > that the question is whether someone (or multiple
> > people)
> > > > > wants
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > step up
> > > > > > > > > > > > and drive a release--if releases were costless, this
> > would be
> > > > > > > much
> > > > > > > > > > > > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch
> > release
> > > > > > > > process
> > > > > > > > > > > > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this
> > could
> > > > > be a
> > > > > > > > test
> > > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us
> > better
> > > > > > > distribute
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > work of producing binary artifacts.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be
> > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > manager?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > [1]:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > > > > > > > > > > > [2]:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Jorge Cardoso Leitão <jo...@gmail.com>.
Hi,

This is now up for voting; thank you for your patience. Just wanna drop a
big thank you to Krisztián and Kouhei for the help and support in this
process.

Best,
Jorge


On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:04 PM Krisztián Szűcs <sz...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 9:05 PM Neal Richardson
> <ne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > How does one get their key in the Web of Trust? We do need to be able to
> > add people to that so that it's not just the same handful of individuals
> > who can be release manager, and now seems like a great time to add Jorge.
> Totally agree, we should have more Arrow PMC members in the web of
> trust though the process is a bit more involved.
>
> The release signing procedure is documented at [1], web-of-trust is
> explained at [2] and [3].
> In short, it is preferred to meet in person for keysigning to maintain
> strong web-of-trust.
> Though a secure channel (like an online meeting) is more likely in the
> current circumstances.
>
> [1]: https://infra.apache.org/release-signing.html
> [2]: https://infra.apache.org/release-signing.html#web-of-trust
> [3]: https://infra.apache.org/openpgp.html#apache-wot
> >
> > Neal
> >
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:52 AM Krisztián Szűcs <
> szucs.krisztian@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I think your GPG key hasn't been configured yet, at least it is not in
> > > the KEYS file [1].
> > > The source release tarball must be signed by the release manager.
> > >
> > > Do you have an Apache Code Signing key?
> > > If not, then it could be better if either Kou or I would be the
> > > release manager.
> > >
> > > [1]: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/arrow/KEYS
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:45 PM Krisztián Szűcs
> > > <sz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:30 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks, Krisztián!
> > > > >
> > > > > I saw that ARROW-12769 and ARROW-12619 were also just
> cherry-picked,
> > > so we
> > > > > are 2 to go:
> > > > >
> > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> > > > Resolved now, but didn't require a patch on our side.
> > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
> > > > Just merged it.
> > > >
> > > > The maintenance branch should be ready now.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Jorge
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 1:42 PM Krisztián Szűcs <
> > > szucs.krisztian@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 7:44 AM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have started collecting commits to the maint branch [1]. The
> > > exact
> > > > > > > commands I used:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > git clone git@github.com:apache/arrow.git
> > > > > > > cd arrow/dev
> > > > > > > python3 -m venv venv
> > > > > > > source venv/bin/activate
> > > > > > > pip install -e archery
> > > > > > > pip install GitPython jira semver jinja2
> > > > > > > archery release cherry-pick 4.0.1
> > > > > > > # ran the commands it printed one by one
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There is a commit that does not apply cleanly. Could someone
> from
> > > C++
> > > > > > merge
> > > > > > > it? What to do:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Run `git fetch upstream && git checkout maint-4.0.x && git
> > > cherry-pick
> > > > > > > ce2861713472818eea264957de4cc83d5a2c567c`
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This will trigger a merge conflict. Resolve and push to
> > > maint-4.0.x on
> > > > > > > apache/arrow.
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I've recreated the maintenance branch and resolved the conflicts.
> > > > > > According to the release curation script [1], we have 4 issues
> > > without
> > > > > > available patches:
> > > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12769 (Joris has
> just
> > > > > > submitted a PR)
> > > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12619
> > > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> > > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1]:
> https://gist.github.com/kszucs/ee55942138caf14845fdecf43edb3ecc
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Jorge
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/maint-4.0.x
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 1:23 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks for taking this on. Krisztián can confirm the details
> (or
> > > point
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > to where this is documented), but based on past patch
> releases, I
> > > > > > believe
> > > > > > > > you would make a `maint-4.0.x` branch off of the existing
> > > > > > `release-4.0.0`
> > > > > > > > branch, cherry-pick the commits associated with the JIRAs
> tagged
> > > for
> > > > > > 4.0.1
> > > > > > > > (I believe there are utility scripts to help with this), and
> run
> > > the
> > > > > > > > release script that bumps the versions.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:32 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão <
> > > > > > > > jorgecarleitao@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Just to make sure: the goal is to cherry-pick all changes
> > > targeted
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > 4.0.1 into a branch and release from there? If that is the
> > > case,
> > > > > > then I
> > > > > > > > > will create a branch and start cherry-picking the changes
> in
> > > order
> > > > > > they
> > > > > > > > > were merged in master.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I see 5 issues on the list still open. I subscribed to them
> > > and will
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > cherry-picking them as they get merged.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On the Rust side; we can either bump 4.1.0 or cherry-pick
> for a
> > > > > > 4.0.1. I
> > > > > > > > > suggest 4.0.1 to keep parity as we recently agreed, but
> let me
> > > know
> > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > others disagree.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/289
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 5:54 PM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks, Jorge!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If anyone else has bugfixes that they'd like included in
> a
> > > patch
> > > > > > > > release,
> > > > > > > > > > please tag them with the 4.0.1 Fix Version. Perhaps we
> can
> > > do a
> > > > > > roundup
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > start a vote early next week?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 8:20 AM Wes McKinney <
> > > wesmckinn@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release
> > > sounds
> > > > > > like a
> > > > > > > > > > > good idea to me.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > > > > > > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > > > > > Jorge
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > > > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to
> > > gauge
> > > > > > > > interest
> > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > doing
> > > > > > > > > > > > > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with
> > > 4.0.1 [1].
> > > > > > > > There
> > > > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > > 3
> > > > > > > > > > > > > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer
> raised
> > > > > > yesterday
> > > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > requesting a patch release.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my
> > > opinion
> > > > > > (yet). I
> > > > > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > > > > say
> > > > > > > > > > > > > that the question is whether someone (or multiple
> > > people)
> > > > > > wants
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > step up
> > > > > > > > > > > > > and drive a release--if releases were costless,
> this
> > > would be
> > > > > > > > much
> > > > > > > > > > > > > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler
> patch
> > > release
> > > > > > > > > process
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so
> this
> > > could
> > > > > > be a
> > > > > > > > > test
> > > > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > > > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us
> > > better
> > > > > > > > distribute
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > work of producing binary artifacts.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Any thoughts--especially from those who
> could/would be
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > > manager?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > [1]:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > > > > > > > > > > > > [2]:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Krisztián Szűcs <sz...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 9:05 PM Neal Richardson
<ne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> How does one get their key in the Web of Trust? We do need to be able to
> add people to that so that it's not just the same handful of individuals
> who can be release manager, and now seems like a great time to add Jorge.
Totally agree, we should have more Arrow PMC members in the web of
trust though the process is a bit more involved.

The release signing procedure is documented at [1], web-of-trust is
explained at [2] and [3].
In short, it is preferred to meet in person for keysigning to maintain
strong web-of-trust.
Though a secure channel (like an online meeting) is more likely in the
current circumstances.

[1]: https://infra.apache.org/release-signing.html
[2]: https://infra.apache.org/release-signing.html#web-of-trust
[3]: https://infra.apache.org/openpgp.html#apache-wot
>
> Neal
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:52 AM Krisztián Szűcs <sz...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I think your GPG key hasn't been configured yet, at least it is not in
> > the KEYS file [1].
> > The source release tarball must be signed by the release manager.
> >
> > Do you have an Apache Code Signing key?
> > If not, then it could be better if either Kou or I would be the
> > release manager.
> >
> > [1]: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/arrow/KEYS
> >
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:45 PM Krisztián Szűcs
> > <sz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:30 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks, Krisztián!
> > > >
> > > > I saw that ARROW-12769 and ARROW-12619 were also just cherry-picked,
> > so we
> > > > are 2 to go:
> > > >
> > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> > > Resolved now, but didn't require a patch on our side.
> > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
> > > Just merged it.
> > >
> > > The maintenance branch should be ready now.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Jorge
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 1:42 PM Krisztián Szűcs <
> > szucs.krisztian@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 7:44 AM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have started collecting commits to the maint branch [1]. The
> > exact
> > > > > > commands I used:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > git clone git@github.com:apache/arrow.git
> > > > > > cd arrow/dev
> > > > > > python3 -m venv venv
> > > > > > source venv/bin/activate
> > > > > > pip install -e archery
> > > > > > pip install GitPython jira semver jinja2
> > > > > > archery release cherry-pick 4.0.1
> > > > > > # ran the commands it printed one by one
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is a commit that does not apply cleanly. Could someone from
> > C++
> > > > > merge
> > > > > > it? What to do:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Run `git fetch upstream && git checkout maint-4.0.x && git
> > cherry-pick
> > > > > > ce2861713472818eea264957de4cc83d5a2c567c`
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This will trigger a merge conflict. Resolve and push to
> > maint-4.0.x on
> > > > > > apache/arrow.
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I've recreated the maintenance branch and resolved the conflicts.
> > > > > According to the release curation script [1], we have 4 issues
> > without
> > > > > available patches:
> > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12769 (Joris has just
> > > > > submitted a PR)
> > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12619
> > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> > > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]: https://gist.github.com/kszucs/ee55942138caf14845fdecf43edb3ecc
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Jorge
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/maint-4.0.x
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 1:23 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for taking this on. Krisztián can confirm the details (or
> > point
> > > > > you
> > > > > > > to where this is documented), but based on past patch releases, I
> > > > > believe
> > > > > > > you would make a `maint-4.0.x` branch off of the existing
> > > > > `release-4.0.0`
> > > > > > > branch, cherry-pick the commits associated with the JIRAs tagged
> > for
> > > > > 4.0.1
> > > > > > > (I believe there are utility scripts to help with this), and run
> > the
> > > > > > > release script that bumps the versions.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:32 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão <
> > > > > > > jorgecarleitao@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Just to make sure: the goal is to cherry-pick all changes
> > targeted
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > > 4.0.1 into a branch and release from there? If that is the
> > case,
> > > > > then I
> > > > > > > > will create a branch and start cherry-picking the changes in
> > order
> > > > > they
> > > > > > > > were merged in master.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I see 5 issues on the list still open. I subscribed to them
> > and will
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > > cherry-picking them as they get merged.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On the Rust side; we can either bump 4.1.0 or cherry-pick for a
> > > > > 4.0.1. I
> > > > > > > > suggest 4.0.1 to keep parity as we recently agreed, but let me
> > know
> > > > > if
> > > > > > > > others disagree.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/289
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 5:54 PM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks, Jorge!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If anyone else has bugfixes that they'd like included in a
> > patch
> > > > > > > release,
> > > > > > > > > please tag them with the 4.0.1 Fix Version. Perhaps we can
> > do a
> > > > > roundup
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > start a vote early next week?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 8:20 AM Wes McKinney <
> > wesmckinn@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release
> > sounds
> > > > > like a
> > > > > > > > > > good idea to me.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > > > > > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > > > > Jorge
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > > > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to
> > gauge
> > > > > > > interest
> > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > doing
> > > > > > > > > > > > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with
> > 4.0.1 [1].
> > > > > > > There
> > > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > 3
> > > > > > > > > > > > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised
> > > > > yesterday
> > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > > requesting a patch release.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my
> > opinion
> > > > > (yet). I
> > > > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > > > say
> > > > > > > > > > > > that the question is whether someone (or multiple
> > people)
> > > > > wants
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > step up
> > > > > > > > > > > > and drive a release--if releases were costless, this
> > would be
> > > > > > > much
> > > > > > > > > > > > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch
> > release
> > > > > > > > process
> > > > > > > > > > > > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this
> > could
> > > > > be a
> > > > > > > > test
> > > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us
> > better
> > > > > > > distribute
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > work of producing binary artifacts.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be
> > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > manager?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > [1]:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > > > > > > > > > > > [2]:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Neal Richardson <ne...@gmail.com>.
How does one get their key in the Web of Trust? We do need to be able to
add people to that so that it's not just the same handful of individuals
who can be release manager, and now seems like a great time to add Jorge.

Neal

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:52 AM Krisztián Szűcs <sz...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I think your GPG key hasn't been configured yet, at least it is not in
> the KEYS file [1].
> The source release tarball must be signed by the release manager.
>
> Do you have an Apache Code Signing key?
> If not, then it could be better if either Kou or I would be the
> release manager.
>
> [1]: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/arrow/KEYS
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:45 PM Krisztián Szűcs
> <sz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:30 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks, Krisztián!
> > >
> > > I saw that ARROW-12769 and ARROW-12619 were also just cherry-picked,
> so we
> > > are 2 to go:
> > >
> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> > Resolved now, but didn't require a patch on our side.
> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
> > Just merged it.
> >
> > The maintenance branch should be ready now.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Jorge
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 1:42 PM Krisztián Szűcs <
> szucs.krisztian@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 7:44 AM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I have started collecting commits to the maint branch [1]. The
> exact
> > > > > commands I used:
> > > > >
> > > > > git clone git@github.com:apache/arrow.git
> > > > > cd arrow/dev
> > > > > python3 -m venv venv
> > > > > source venv/bin/activate
> > > > > pip install -e archery
> > > > > pip install GitPython jira semver jinja2
> > > > > archery release cherry-pick 4.0.1
> > > > > # ran the commands it printed one by one
> > > > >
> > > > > There is a commit that does not apply cleanly. Could someone from
> C++
> > > > merge
> > > > > it? What to do:
> > > > >
> > > > > Run `git fetch upstream && git checkout maint-4.0.x && git
> cherry-pick
> > > > > ce2861713472818eea264957de4cc83d5a2c567c`
> > > > >
> > > > > This will trigger a merge conflict. Resolve and push to
> maint-4.0.x on
> > > > > apache/arrow.
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I've recreated the maintenance branch and resolved the conflicts.
> > > > According to the release curation script [1], we have 4 issues
> without
> > > > available patches:
> > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12769 (Joris has just
> > > > submitted a PR)
> > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12619
> > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
> > > >
> > > > [1]: https://gist.github.com/kszucs/ee55942138caf14845fdecf43edb3ecc
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Jorge
> > > > >
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/maint-4.0.x
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 1:23 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for taking this on. Krisztián can confirm the details (or
> point
> > > > you
> > > > > > to where this is documented), but based on past patch releases, I
> > > > believe
> > > > > > you would make a `maint-4.0.x` branch off of the existing
> > > > `release-4.0.0`
> > > > > > branch, cherry-pick the commits associated with the JIRAs tagged
> for
> > > > 4.0.1
> > > > > > (I believe there are utility scripts to help with this), and run
> the
> > > > > > release script that bumps the versions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Neal
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:32 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão <
> > > > > > jorgecarleitao@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Just to make sure: the goal is to cherry-pick all changes
> targeted
> > > > for
> > > > > > > 4.0.1 into a branch and release from there? If that is the
> case,
> > > > then I
> > > > > > > will create a branch and start cherry-picking the changes in
> order
> > > > they
> > > > > > > were merged in master.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I see 5 issues on the list still open. I subscribed to them
> and will
> > > > be
> > > > > > > cherry-picking them as they get merged.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On the Rust side; we can either bump 4.1.0 or cherry-pick for a
> > > > 4.0.1. I
> > > > > > > suggest 4.0.1 to keep parity as we recently agreed, but let me
> know
> > > > if
> > > > > > > others disagree.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/289
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 5:54 PM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks, Jorge!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If anyone else has bugfixes that they'd like included in a
> patch
> > > > > > release,
> > > > > > > > please tag them with the 4.0.1 Fix Version. Perhaps we can
> do a
> > > > roundup
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > start a vote early next week?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 8:20 AM Wes McKinney <
> wesmckinn@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release
> sounds
> > > > like a
> > > > > > > > > good idea to me.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > > > > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > > > Jorge
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to
> gauge
> > > > > > interest
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > doing
> > > > > > > > > > > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with
> 4.0.1 [1].
> > > > > > There
> > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > 3
> > > > > > > > > > > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised
> > > > yesterday
> > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > requesting a patch release.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my
> opinion
> > > > (yet). I
> > > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > > say
> > > > > > > > > > > that the question is whether someone (or multiple
> people)
> > > > wants
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > step up
> > > > > > > > > > > and drive a release--if releases were costless, this
> would be
> > > > > > much
> > > > > > > > > > > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch
> release
> > > > > > > process
> > > > > > > > > > > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this
> could
> > > > be a
> > > > > > > test
> > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us
> better
> > > > > > distribute
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > work of producing binary artifacts.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be
> > > > release
> > > > > > > > manager?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > [1]:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > > > > > > > > > > [2]:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Krisztián Szűcs <sz...@gmail.com>.
I think your GPG key hasn't been configured yet, at least it is not in
the KEYS file [1].
The source release tarball must be signed by the release manager.

Do you have an Apache Code Signing key?
If not, then it could be better if either Kou or I would be the
release manager.

[1]: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/arrow/KEYS

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:45 PM Krisztián Szűcs
<sz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:30 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, Krisztián!
> >
> > I saw that ARROW-12769 and ARROW-12619 were also just cherry-picked, so we
> > are 2 to go:
> >
> > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> Resolved now, but didn't require a patch on our side.
> > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
> Just merged it.
>
> The maintenance branch should be ready now.
> >
> > Best,
> > Jorge
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 1:42 PM Krisztián Szűcs <sz...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 7:44 AM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I have started collecting commits to the maint branch [1]. The exact
> > > > commands I used:
> > > >
> > > > git clone git@github.com:apache/arrow.git
> > > > cd arrow/dev
> > > > python3 -m venv venv
> > > > source venv/bin/activate
> > > > pip install -e archery
> > > > pip install GitPython jira semver jinja2
> > > > archery release cherry-pick 4.0.1
> > > > # ran the commands it printed one by one
> > > >
> > > > There is a commit that does not apply cleanly. Could someone from C++
> > > merge
> > > > it? What to do:
> > > >
> > > > Run `git fetch upstream && git checkout maint-4.0.x && git cherry-pick
> > > > ce2861713472818eea264957de4cc83d5a2c567c`
> > > >
> > > > This will trigger a merge conflict. Resolve and push to maint-4.0.x on
> > > > apache/arrow.
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I've recreated the maintenance branch and resolved the conflicts.
> > > According to the release curation script [1], we have 4 issues without
> > > available patches:
> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12769 (Joris has just
> > > submitted a PR)
> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12619
> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
> > >
> > > [1]: https://gist.github.com/kszucs/ee55942138caf14845fdecf43edb3ecc
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Jorge
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/maint-4.0.x
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 1:23 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks for taking this on. Krisztián can confirm the details (or point
> > > you
> > > > > to where this is documented), but based on past patch releases, I
> > > believe
> > > > > you would make a `maint-4.0.x` branch off of the existing
> > > `release-4.0.0`
> > > > > branch, cherry-pick the commits associated with the JIRAs tagged for
> > > 4.0.1
> > > > > (I believe there are utility scripts to help with this), and run the
> > > > > release script that bumps the versions.
> > > > >
> > > > > Neal
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:32 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão <
> > > > > jorgecarleitao@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Just to make sure: the goal is to cherry-pick all changes targeted
> > > for
> > > > > > 4.0.1 into a branch and release from there? If that is the case,
> > > then I
> > > > > > will create a branch and start cherry-picking the changes in order
> > > they
> > > > > > were merged in master.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I see 5 issues on the list still open. I subscribed to them and will
> > > be
> > > > > > cherry-picking them as they get merged.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On the Rust side; we can either bump 4.1.0 or cherry-pick for a
> > > 4.0.1. I
> > > > > > suggest 4.0.1 to keep parity as we recently agreed, but let me know
> > > if
> > > > > > others disagree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/289
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 5:54 PM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks, Jorge!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If anyone else has bugfixes that they'd like included in a patch
> > > > > release,
> > > > > > > please tag them with the 4.0.1 Fix Version. Perhaps we can do a
> > > roundup
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > start a vote early next week?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 8:20 AM Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release sounds
> > > like a
> > > > > > > > good idea to me.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > > > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > > Jorge
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to gauge
> > > > > interest
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > doing
> > > > > > > > > > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with 4.0.1 [1].
> > > > > There
> > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > 3
> > > > > > > > > > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised
> > > yesterday
> > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > requesting a patch release.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my opinion
> > > (yet). I
> > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > say
> > > > > > > > > > that the question is whether someone (or multiple people)
> > > wants
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > step up
> > > > > > > > > > and drive a release--if releases were costless, this would be
> > > > > much
> > > > > > > > > > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch release
> > > > > > process
> > > > > > > > > > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this could
> > > be a
> > > > > > test
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us better
> > > > > distribute
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > work of producing binary artifacts.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be
> > > release
> > > > > > > manager?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > [1]:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > > > > > > > > > [2]:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Micah Kornfield <em...@gmail.com>.
Small logistical question.  Jorge do you have a PGP key in the Apache Web
of Trust [1]

[1] https://infra.apache.org/release-signing.html#web-of-trust

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:46 AM Krisztián Szűcs <sz...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:30 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, Krisztián!
> >
> > I saw that ARROW-12769 and ARROW-12619 were also just cherry-picked, so
> we
> > are 2 to go:
> >
> > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> Resolved now, but didn't require a patch on our side.
> > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
> Just merged it.
>
> The maintenance branch should be ready now.
> >
> > Best,
> > Jorge
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 1:42 PM Krisztián Szűcs <
> szucs.krisztian@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 7:44 AM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I have started collecting commits to the maint branch [1]. The exact
> > > > commands I used:
> > > >
> > > > git clone git@github.com:apache/arrow.git
> > > > cd arrow/dev
> > > > python3 -m venv venv
> > > > source venv/bin/activate
> > > > pip install -e archery
> > > > pip install GitPython jira semver jinja2
> > > > archery release cherry-pick 4.0.1
> > > > # ran the commands it printed one by one
> > > >
> > > > There is a commit that does not apply cleanly. Could someone from C++
> > > merge
> > > > it? What to do:
> > > >
> > > > Run `git fetch upstream && git checkout maint-4.0.x && git
> cherry-pick
> > > > ce2861713472818eea264957de4cc83d5a2c567c`
> > > >
> > > > This will trigger a merge conflict. Resolve and push to maint-4.0.x
> on
> > > > apache/arrow.
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I've recreated the maintenance branch and resolved the conflicts.
> > > According to the release curation script [1], we have 4 issues without
> > > available patches:
> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12769 (Joris has just
> > > submitted a PR)
> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12619
> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
> > >
> > > [1]: https://gist.github.com/kszucs/ee55942138caf14845fdecf43edb3ecc
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Jorge
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/maint-4.0.x
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 1:23 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks for taking this on. Krisztián can confirm the details (or
> point
> > > you
> > > > > to where this is documented), but based on past patch releases, I
> > > believe
> > > > > you would make a `maint-4.0.x` branch off of the existing
> > > `release-4.0.0`
> > > > > branch, cherry-pick the commits associated with the JIRAs tagged
> for
> > > 4.0.1
> > > > > (I believe there are utility scripts to help with this), and run
> the
> > > > > release script that bumps the versions.
> > > > >
> > > > > Neal
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:32 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão <
> > > > > jorgecarleitao@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Just to make sure: the goal is to cherry-pick all changes
> targeted
> > > for
> > > > > > 4.0.1 into a branch and release from there? If that is the case,
> > > then I
> > > > > > will create a branch and start cherry-picking the changes in
> order
> > > they
> > > > > > were merged in master.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I see 5 issues on the list still open. I subscribed to them and
> will
> > > be
> > > > > > cherry-picking them as they get merged.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On the Rust side; we can either bump 4.1.0 or cherry-pick for a
> > > 4.0.1. I
> > > > > > suggest 4.0.1 to keep parity as we recently agreed, but let me
> know
> > > if
> > > > > > others disagree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/289
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 5:54 PM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks, Jorge!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If anyone else has bugfixes that they'd like included in a
> patch
> > > > > release,
> > > > > > > please tag them with the 4.0.1 Fix Version. Perhaps we can do a
> > > roundup
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > start a vote early next week?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 8:20 AM Wes McKinney <
> wesmckinn@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release sounds
> > > like a
> > > > > > > > good idea to me.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > > > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > > Jorge
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to gauge
> > > > > interest
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > doing
> > > > > > > > > > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with 4.0.1
> [1].
> > > > > There
> > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > 3
> > > > > > > > > > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised
> > > yesterday
> > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > requesting a patch release.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my opinion
> > > (yet). I
> > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > say
> > > > > > > > > > that the question is whether someone (or multiple people)
> > > wants
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > step up
> > > > > > > > > > and drive a release--if releases were costless, this
> would be
> > > > > much
> > > > > > > > > > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch
> release
> > > > > > process
> > > > > > > > > > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this
> could
> > > be a
> > > > > > test
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us better
> > > > > distribute
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > work of producing binary artifacts.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be
> > > release
> > > > > > > manager?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > [1]:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > > > > > > > > > [2]:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Krisztián Szűcs <sz...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:30 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks, Krisztián!
>
> I saw that ARROW-12769 and ARROW-12619 were also just cherry-picked, so we
> are 2 to go:
>
> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
Resolved now, but didn't require a patch on our side.
> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
Just merged it.

The maintenance branch should be ready now.
>
> Best,
> Jorge
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 1:42 PM Krisztián Szűcs <sz...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 7:44 AM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have started collecting commits to the maint branch [1]. The exact
> > > commands I used:
> > >
> > > git clone git@github.com:apache/arrow.git
> > > cd arrow/dev
> > > python3 -m venv venv
> > > source venv/bin/activate
> > > pip install -e archery
> > > pip install GitPython jira semver jinja2
> > > archery release cherry-pick 4.0.1
> > > # ran the commands it printed one by one
> > >
> > > There is a commit that does not apply cleanly. Could someone from C++
> > merge
> > > it? What to do:
> > >
> > > Run `git fetch upstream && git checkout maint-4.0.x && git cherry-pick
> > > ce2861713472818eea264957de4cc83d5a2c567c`
> > >
> > > This will trigger a merge conflict. Resolve and push to maint-4.0.x on
> > > apache/arrow.
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've recreated the maintenance branch and resolved the conflicts.
> > According to the release curation script [1], we have 4 issues without
> > available patches:
> > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12769 (Joris has just
> > submitted a PR)
> > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12619
> > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
> >
> > [1]: https://gist.github.com/kszucs/ee55942138caf14845fdecf43edb3ecc
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Jorge
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/maint-4.0.x
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 1:23 AM Neal Richardson <
> > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for taking this on. Krisztián can confirm the details (or point
> > you
> > > > to where this is documented), but based on past patch releases, I
> > believe
> > > > you would make a `maint-4.0.x` branch off of the existing
> > `release-4.0.0`
> > > > branch, cherry-pick the commits associated with the JIRAs tagged for
> > 4.0.1
> > > > (I believe there are utility scripts to help with this), and run the
> > > > release script that bumps the versions.
> > > >
> > > > Neal
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:32 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão <
> > > > jorgecarleitao@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Just to make sure: the goal is to cherry-pick all changes targeted
> > for
> > > > > 4.0.1 into a branch and release from there? If that is the case,
> > then I
> > > > > will create a branch and start cherry-picking the changes in order
> > they
> > > > > were merged in master.
> > > > >
> > > > > I see 5 issues on the list still open. I subscribed to them and will
> > be
> > > > > cherry-picking them as they get merged.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the Rust side; we can either bump 4.1.0 or cherry-pick for a
> > 4.0.1. I
> > > > > suggest 4.0.1 to keep parity as we recently agreed, but let me know
> > if
> > > > > others disagree.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/289
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 5:54 PM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks, Jorge!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If anyone else has bugfixes that they'd like included in a patch
> > > > release,
> > > > > > please tag them with the 4.0.1 Fix Version. Perhaps we can do a
> > roundup
> > > > > and
> > > > > > start a vote early next week?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Neal
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 8:20 AM Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release sounds
> > like a
> > > > > > > good idea to me.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > Jorge
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to gauge
> > > > interest
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > doing
> > > > > > > > > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with 4.0.1 [1].
> > > > There
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > 3
> > > > > > > > > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised
> > yesterday
> > > > > [2]
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > requesting a patch release.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my opinion
> > (yet). I
> > > > > > will
> > > > > > > say
> > > > > > > > > that the question is whether someone (or multiple people)
> > wants
> > > > to
> > > > > > > step up
> > > > > > > > > and drive a release--if releases were costless, this would be
> > > > much
> > > > > > > > > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch release
> > > > > process
> > > > > > > > > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this could
> > be a
> > > > > test
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us better
> > > > distribute
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > work of producing binary artifacts.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be
> > release
> > > > > > manager?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [1]:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > > > > > > > > [2]:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Jorge Cardoso Leitão <jo...@gmail.com>.
Thanks, Krisztián!

I saw that ARROW-12769 and ARROW-12619 were also just cherry-picked, so we
are 2 to go:

- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603

Best,
Jorge



On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 1:42 PM Krisztián Szűcs <sz...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 7:44 AM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have started collecting commits to the maint branch [1]. The exact
> > commands I used:
> >
> > git clone git@github.com:apache/arrow.git
> > cd arrow/dev
> > python3 -m venv venv
> > source venv/bin/activate
> > pip install -e archery
> > pip install GitPython jira semver jinja2
> > archery release cherry-pick 4.0.1
> > # ran the commands it printed one by one
> >
> > There is a commit that does not apply cleanly. Could someone from C++
> merge
> > it? What to do:
> >
> > Run `git fetch upstream && git checkout maint-4.0.x && git cherry-pick
> > ce2861713472818eea264957de4cc83d5a2c567c`
> >
> > This will trigger a merge conflict. Resolve and push to maint-4.0.x on
> > apache/arrow.
> Hi,
>
> I've recreated the maintenance branch and resolved the conflicts.
> According to the release curation script [1], we have 4 issues without
> available patches:
> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12769 (Joris has just
> submitted a PR)
> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12619
> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
>
> [1]: https://gist.github.com/kszucs/ee55942138caf14845fdecf43edb3ecc
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jorge
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/maint-4.0.x
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 1:23 AM Neal Richardson <
> neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for taking this on. Krisztián can confirm the details (or point
> you
> > > to where this is documented), but based on past patch releases, I
> believe
> > > you would make a `maint-4.0.x` branch off of the existing
> `release-4.0.0`
> > > branch, cherry-pick the commits associated with the JIRAs tagged for
> 4.0.1
> > > (I believe there are utility scripts to help with this), and run the
> > > release script that bumps the versions.
> > >
> > > Neal
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:32 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão <
> > > jorgecarleitao@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Just to make sure: the goal is to cherry-pick all changes targeted
> for
> > > > 4.0.1 into a branch and release from there? If that is the case,
> then I
> > > > will create a branch and start cherry-picking the changes in order
> they
> > > > were merged in master.
> > > >
> > > > I see 5 issues on the list still open. I subscribed to them and will
> be
> > > > cherry-picking them as they get merged.
> > > >
> > > > On the Rust side; we can either bump 4.1.0 or cherry-pick for a
> 4.0.1. I
> > > > suggest 4.0.1 to keep parity as we recently agreed, but let me know
> if
> > > > others disagree.
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/289
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 5:54 PM Neal Richardson <
> > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks, Jorge!
> > > > >
> > > > > If anyone else has bugfixes that they'd like included in a patch
> > > release,
> > > > > please tag them with the 4.0.1 Fix Version. Perhaps we can do a
> roundup
> > > > and
> > > > > start a vote early next week?
> > > > >
> > > > > Neal
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 8:20 AM Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release sounds
> like a
> > > > > > good idea to me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > Jorge
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to gauge
> > > interest
> > > > in
> > > > > > doing
> > > > > > > > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with 4.0.1 [1].
> > > There
> > > > > are
> > > > > > 3
> > > > > > > > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised
> yesterday
> > > > [2]
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > > requesting a patch release.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my opinion
> (yet). I
> > > > > will
> > > > > > say
> > > > > > > > that the question is whether someone (or multiple people)
> wants
> > > to
> > > > > > step up
> > > > > > > > and drive a release--if releases were costless, this would be
> > > much
> > > > > > > > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch release
> > > > process
> > > > > > > > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this could
> be a
> > > > test
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us better
> > > distribute
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > work of producing binary artifacts.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be
> release
> > > > > manager?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1]:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > > > > > > > [2]:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by David Li <li...@apache.org>.
I'll provide a backport for ARROW-12603 - it's a duplicate of another
issue but the change there would pull in a lot of unrelated changes.

Best,
David

On 2021/05/17 11:42:11, Krisztián Szűcs <sz...@gmail.com> wrote: 
> On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 7:44 AM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have started collecting commits to the maint branch [1]. The exact
> > commands I used:
> >
> > git clone git@github.com:apache/arrow.git
> > cd arrow/dev
> > python3 -m venv venv
> > source venv/bin/activate
> > pip install -e archery
> > pip install GitPython jira semver jinja2
> > archery release cherry-pick 4.0.1
> > # ran the commands it printed one by one
> >
> > There is a commit that does not apply cleanly. Could someone from C++ merge
> > it? What to do:
> >
> > Run `git fetch upstream && git checkout maint-4.0.x && git cherry-pick
> > ce2861713472818eea264957de4cc83d5a2c567c`
> >
> > This will trigger a merge conflict. Resolve and push to maint-4.0.x on
> > apache/arrow.
> Hi,
> 
> I've recreated the maintenance branch and resolved the conflicts.
> According to the release curation script [1], we have 4 issues without
> available patches:
> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12769 (Joris has just
> submitted a PR)
> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12619
> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603
> 
> [1]: https://gist.github.com/kszucs/ee55942138caf14845fdecf43edb3ecc
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jorge
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/maint-4.0.x
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 1:23 AM Neal Richardson <ne...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for taking this on. Krisztián can confirm the details (or point you
> > > to where this is documented), but based on past patch releases, I believe
> > > you would make a `maint-4.0.x` branch off of the existing `release-4.0.0`
> > > branch, cherry-pick the commits associated with the JIRAs tagged for 4.0.1
> > > (I believe there are utility scripts to help with this), and run the
> > > release script that bumps the versions.
> > >
> > > Neal
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:32 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão <
> > > jorgecarleitao@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Just to make sure: the goal is to cherry-pick all changes targeted for
> > > > 4.0.1 into a branch and release from there? If that is the case, then I
> > > > will create a branch and start cherry-picking the changes in order they
> > > > were merged in master.
> > > >
> > > > I see 5 issues on the list still open. I subscribed to them and will be
> > > > cherry-picking them as they get merged.
> > > >
> > > > On the Rust side; we can either bump 4.1.0 or cherry-pick for a 4.0.1. I
> > > > suggest 4.0.1 to keep parity as we recently agreed, but let me know if
> > > > others disagree.
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/289
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 5:54 PM Neal Richardson <
> > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks, Jorge!
> > > > >
> > > > > If anyone else has bugfixes that they'd like included in a patch
> > > release,
> > > > > please tag them with the 4.0.1 Fix Version. Perhaps we can do a roundup
> > > > and
> > > > > start a vote early next week?
> > > > >
> > > > > Neal
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 8:20 AM Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release sounds like a
> > > > > > good idea to me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > Jorge
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to gauge
> > > interest
> > > > in
> > > > > > doing
> > > > > > > > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with 4.0.1 [1].
> > > There
> > > > > are
> > > > > > 3
> > > > > > > > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised yesterday
> > > > [2]
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > > requesting a patch release.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my opinion (yet). I
> > > > > will
> > > > > > say
> > > > > > > > that the question is whether someone (or multiple people) wants
> > > to
> > > > > > step up
> > > > > > > > and drive a release--if releases were costless, this would be
> > > much
> > > > > > > > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch release
> > > > process
> > > > > > > > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this could be a
> > > > test
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us better
> > > distribute
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > work of producing binary artifacts.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be release
> > > > > manager?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1]:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > > > > > > > [2]:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Krisztián Szűcs <sz...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 7:44 AM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have started collecting commits to the maint branch [1]. The exact
> commands I used:
>
> git clone git@github.com:apache/arrow.git
> cd arrow/dev
> python3 -m venv venv
> source venv/bin/activate
> pip install -e archery
> pip install GitPython jira semver jinja2
> archery release cherry-pick 4.0.1
> # ran the commands it printed one by one
>
> There is a commit that does not apply cleanly. Could someone from C++ merge
> it? What to do:
>
> Run `git fetch upstream && git checkout maint-4.0.x && git cherry-pick
> ce2861713472818eea264957de4cc83d5a2c567c`
>
> This will trigger a merge conflict. Resolve and push to maint-4.0.x on
> apache/arrow.
Hi,

I've recreated the maintenance branch and resolved the conflicts.
According to the release curation script [1], we have 4 issues without
available patches:
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12769 (Joris has just
submitted a PR)
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12619
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12604
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-12603

[1]: https://gist.github.com/kszucs/ee55942138caf14845fdecf43edb3ecc
>
> Thanks,
> Jorge
>
> https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/maint-4.0.x
>
>
>
> On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 1:23 AM Neal Richardson <ne...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for taking this on. Krisztián can confirm the details (or point you
> > to where this is documented), but based on past patch releases, I believe
> > you would make a `maint-4.0.x` branch off of the existing `release-4.0.0`
> > branch, cherry-pick the commits associated with the JIRAs tagged for 4.0.1
> > (I believe there are utility scripts to help with this), and run the
> > release script that bumps the versions.
> >
> > Neal
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:32 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão <
> > jorgecarleitao@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Just to make sure: the goal is to cherry-pick all changes targeted for
> > > 4.0.1 into a branch and release from there? If that is the case, then I
> > > will create a branch and start cherry-picking the changes in order they
> > > were merged in master.
> > >
> > > I see 5 issues on the list still open. I subscribed to them and will be
> > > cherry-picking them as they get merged.
> > >
> > > On the Rust side; we can either bump 4.1.0 or cherry-pick for a 4.0.1. I
> > > suggest 4.0.1 to keep parity as we recently agreed, but let me know if
> > > others disagree.
> > >
> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/289
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 5:54 PM Neal Richardson <
> > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks, Jorge!
> > > >
> > > > If anyone else has bugfixes that they'd like included in a patch
> > release,
> > > > please tag them with the 4.0.1 Fix Version. Perhaps we can do a roundup
> > > and
> > > > start a vote early next week?
> > > >
> > > > Neal
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 8:20 AM Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release sounds like a
> > > > > good idea to me.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > Jorge
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to gauge
> > interest
> > > in
> > > > > doing
> > > > > > > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with 4.0.1 [1].
> > There
> > > > are
> > > > > 3
> > > > > > > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised yesterday
> > > [2]
> > > > in
> > > > > > > requesting a patch release.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my opinion (yet). I
> > > > will
> > > > > say
> > > > > > > that the question is whether someone (or multiple people) wants
> > to
> > > > > step up
> > > > > > > and drive a release--if releases were costless, this would be
> > much
> > > > > > > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch release
> > > process
> > > > > > > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this could be a
> > > test
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us better
> > distribute
> > > > the
> > > > > > > work of producing binary artifacts.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be release
> > > > manager?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Neal
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1]:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > > > > > > [2]:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Jorge Cardoso Leitão <jo...@gmail.com>.
Hi,

I have started collecting commits to the maint branch [1]. The exact
commands I used:

git clone git@github.com:apache/arrow.git
cd arrow/dev
python3 -m venv venv
source venv/bin/activate
pip install -e archery
pip install GitPython jira semver jinja2
archery release cherry-pick 4.0.1
# ran the commands it printed one by one

There is a commit that does not apply cleanly. Could someone from C++ merge
it? What to do:

Run `git fetch upstream && git checkout maint-4.0.x && git cherry-pick
ce2861713472818eea264957de4cc83d5a2c567c`

This will trigger a merge conflict. Resolve and push to maint-4.0.x on
apache/arrow.

Thanks,
Jorge

https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/maint-4.0.x



On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 1:23 AM Neal Richardson <ne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thanks for taking this on. Krisztián can confirm the details (or point you
> to where this is documented), but based on past patch releases, I believe
> you would make a `maint-4.0.x` branch off of the existing `release-4.0.0`
> branch, cherry-pick the commits associated with the JIRAs tagged for 4.0.1
> (I believe there are utility scripts to help with this), and run the
> release script that bumps the versions.
>
> Neal
>
>
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:32 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão <
> jorgecarleitao@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Just to make sure: the goal is to cherry-pick all changes targeted for
> > 4.0.1 into a branch and release from there? If that is the case, then I
> > will create a branch and start cherry-picking the changes in order they
> > were merged in master.
> >
> > I see 5 issues on the list still open. I subscribed to them and will be
> > cherry-picking them as they get merged.
> >
> > On the Rust side; we can either bump 4.1.0 or cherry-pick for a 4.0.1. I
> > suggest 4.0.1 to keep parity as we recently agreed, but let me know if
> > others disagree.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/289
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 5:54 PM Neal Richardson <
> > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks, Jorge!
> > >
> > > If anyone else has bugfixes that they'd like included in a patch
> release,
> > > please tag them with the 4.0.1 Fix Version. Perhaps we can do a roundup
> > and
> > > start a vote early next week?
> > >
> > > Neal
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 8:20 AM Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release sounds like a
> > > > good idea to me.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
> > > > >
> > > > > I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Jorge
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to gauge
> interest
> > in
> > > > doing
> > > > > > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with 4.0.1 [1].
> There
> > > are
> > > > 3
> > > > > > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised yesterday
> > [2]
> > > in
> > > > > > requesting a patch release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my opinion (yet). I
> > > will
> > > > say
> > > > > > that the question is whether someone (or multiple people) wants
> to
> > > > step up
> > > > > > and drive a release--if releases were costless, this would be
> much
> > > > > > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch release
> > process
> > > > > > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this could be a
> > test
> > > > for
> > > > > > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us better
> distribute
> > > the
> > > > > > work of producing binary artifacts.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be release
> > > manager?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Neal
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1]:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > > > > > [2]:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Neal Richardson <ne...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for taking this on. Krisztián can confirm the details (or point you
to where this is documented), but based on past patch releases, I believe
you would make a `maint-4.0.x` branch off of the existing `release-4.0.0`
branch, cherry-pick the commits associated with the JIRAs tagged for 4.0.1
(I believe there are utility scripts to help with this), and run the
release script that bumps the versions.

Neal


On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:32 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão <
jorgecarleitao@gmail.com> wrote:

> Just to make sure: the goal is to cherry-pick all changes targeted for
> 4.0.1 into a branch and release from there? If that is the case, then I
> will create a branch and start cherry-picking the changes in order they
> were merged in master.
>
> I see 5 issues on the list still open. I subscribed to them and will be
> cherry-picking them as they get merged.
>
> On the Rust side; we can either bump 4.1.0 or cherry-pick for a 4.0.1. I
> suggest 4.0.1 to keep parity as we recently agreed, but let me know if
> others disagree.
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/289
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 5:54 PM Neal Richardson <
> neal.p.richardson@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks, Jorge!
> >
> > If anyone else has bugfixes that they'd like included in a patch release,
> > please tag them with the 4.0.1 Fix Version. Perhaps we can do a roundup
> and
> > start a vote early next week?
> >
> > Neal
> >
> > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 8:20 AM Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release sounds like a
> > > good idea to me.
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
> > > >
> > > > I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Jorge
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to gauge interest
> in
> > > doing
> > > > > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> > > > >
> > > > > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with 4.0.1 [1]. There
> > are
> > > 3
> > > > > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised yesterday
> [2]
> > in
> > > > > requesting a patch release.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my opinion (yet). I
> > will
> > > say
> > > > > that the question is whether someone (or multiple people) wants to
> > > step up
> > > > > and drive a release--if releases were costless, this would be much
> > > > > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch release
> process
> > > > > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this could be a
> test
> > > for
> > > > > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us better distribute
> > the
> > > > > work of producing binary artifacts.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be release
> > manager?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Neal
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > > > > [2]:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> > > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Jorge Cardoso Leitão <jo...@gmail.com>.
Just to make sure: the goal is to cherry-pick all changes targeted for
4.0.1 into a branch and release from there? If that is the case, then I
will create a branch and start cherry-picking the changes in order they
were merged in master.

I see 5 issues on the list still open. I subscribed to them and will be
cherry-picking them as they get merged.

On the Rust side; we can either bump 4.1.0 or cherry-pick for a 4.0.1. I
suggest 4.0.1 to keep parity as we recently agreed, but let me know if
others disagree.

[1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/289



On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 5:54 PM Neal Richardson <ne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thanks, Jorge!
>
> If anyone else has bugfixes that they'd like included in a patch release,
> please tag them with the 4.0.1 Fix Version. Perhaps we can do a roundup and
> start a vote early next week?
>
> Neal
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 8:20 AM Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release sounds like a
> > good idea to me.
> >
> > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> > <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
> > >
> > > I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Jorge
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to gauge interest in
> > doing
> > > > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> > > >
> > > > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with 4.0.1 [1]. There
> are
> > 3
> > > > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised yesterday [2]
> in
> > > > requesting a patch release.
> > > >
> > > > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my opinion (yet). I
> will
> > say
> > > > that the question is whether someone (or multiple people) wants to
> > step up
> > > > and drive a release--if releases were costless, this would be much
> > > > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch release process
> > > > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this could be a test
> > for
> > > > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us better distribute
> the
> > > > work of producing binary artifacts.
> > > >
> > > > Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be release
> manager?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Neal
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [1]:
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > > > [2]:
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> > > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Neal Richardson <ne...@gmail.com>.
Thanks, Jorge!

If anyone else has bugfixes that they'd like included in a patch release,
please tag them with the 4.0.1 Fix Version. Perhaps we can do a roundup and
start a vote early next week?

Neal

On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 8:20 AM Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release sounds like a
> good idea to me.
>
> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
> <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
> >
> > I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
> >
> > Best,
> > Jorge
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to gauge interest in
> doing
> > > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> > >
> > > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with 4.0.1 [1]. There are
> 3
> > > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised yesterday [2] in
> > > requesting a patch release.
> > >
> > > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my opinion (yet). I will
> say
> > > that the question is whether someone (or multiple people) wants to
> step up
> > > and drive a release--if releases were costless, this would be much
> > > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch release process
> > > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this could be a test
> for
> > > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us better distribute the
> > > work of producing binary artifacts.
> > >
> > > Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be release manager?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Neal
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]:
> > >
> > >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > > [2]:
> > >
> > >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> > >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com>.
Addressing these accumulated issues in a patch release sounds like a
good idea to me.

On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Jorge Cardoso Leitão
<jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I agree. Segfaults are not nice.
>
> I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.
>
> Best,
> Jorge
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
> neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to gauge interest in doing
> > a 4.0.1 patch release.
> >
> > There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with 4.0.1 [1]. There are 3
> > segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised yesterday [2] in
> > requesting a patch release.
> >
> > I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my opinion (yet). I will say
> > that the question is whether someone (or multiple people) wants to step up
> > and drive a release--if releases were costless, this would be much
> > different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch release process
> > (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this could be a test for
> > whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us better distribute the
> > work of producing binary artifacts.
> >
> > Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be release manager?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Neal
> >
> >
> > [1]:
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> > [2]:
> >
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.0.1 patch release?

Posted by Jorge Cardoso Leitão <jo...@gmail.com>.
I agree. Segfaults are not nice.

I can take it. I would possibly need some guidance.

Best,
Jorge



On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:52 AM Neal Richardson <
neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> As discussed at the biweekly sync call, I wanted to gauge interest in doing
> a 4.0.1 patch release.
>
> There currently are 14 issues in JIRA tagged with 4.0.1 [1]. There are 3
> segfaults, including one that a cuDF maintainer raised yesterday [2] in
> requesting a patch release.
>
> I don't want to bias the discussion by giving my opinion (yet). I will say
> that the question is whether someone (or multiple people) wants to step up
> and drive a release--if releases were costless, this would be much
> different. We did decide to allow for a simpler patch release process
> (source vote only, not on binary artifacts), so this could be a test for
> whether that does simplify matters and/or lets us better distribute the
> work of producing binary artifacts.
>
> Any thoughts--especially from those who could/would be release manager?
>
> Thanks,
> Neal
>
>
> [1]:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.0.1
> [2]:
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9444ad73db11fe071a59ef5c084c6d1a02d26d55d23320ea8e0a67ae%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E
>