You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@kudu.apache.org by Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org> on 2016/03/03 01:41:43 UTC
[VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Hi,
We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache Kudu
(incubating) 0.7.1.
This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process of
releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It also takes
care of fixing some licenses.
The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
It was built from this tag:
https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
KEYS file:
http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running the unit
tests.
Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
Thanks,
J-D
Re: [VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Posted by Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>.
+1 (binding)
I downloaded the files, checked the sha1, md5, and signature. I compiled it
on CentOS 6.6 in debug mode, ran the unit tests:
100% tests passed, 0 tests failed out of 179
Label Time Summary:
no_dist_test = 10.24 sec
no_tsan = 3.58 sec
Total Test time (real) = 231.48 sec
I also deployed a release package on a small cluster, ran YCSB, killed a
node, ran YCSB again, brought up the node back, ran YCSB. Finally, ran ksck
with checksum scan and it came back good too.
J-D
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache Kudu
> (incubating) 0.7.1.
>
> This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process of
> releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It also takes
> care of fixing some licenses.
>
> The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
>
> It was built from this tag:
>
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
>
> The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
>
> KEYS file:
> http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
>
> I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running the unit
> tests.
>
> Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
> Thanks,
>
> J-D
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Posted by Adar Dembo <ad...@cloudera.com>.
+1
I built the release on Ubuntu 15.10 (gcc 5.2). All the tests passed. I also
glanced at the list of fixed issues; it looks good to me.
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache Kudu
> (incubating) 0.7.1.
>
> This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process of
> releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It also takes
> care of fixing some licenses.
>
> The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
>
> It was built from this tag:
>
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
>
> The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
>
> KEYS file:
> http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
>
> I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running the unit
> tests.
>
> Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
> Thanks,
>
> J-D
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Posted by Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com>.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Misty Stanley-Jones <
mstanleyjones@cloudera.com> wrote:
> There is a chicken-and-egg problem here. The solution may be that the only
> 'release notes' we have for a patch release like this are links to the JIRA
> query and the Github tags which will show the changes. Those two URLs can
> be predicted ahead of time and will still work even if we have to go
> through multiple RCs. This helps us to stick to not introducing new
> features or incompatible changes in patch releases, since we would have no
> mechanism to document them. We can also add a Release Notes field to JIRA
> so that people can see a draft of the release note for a given issue before
> it is even part of a release.
>
I'm pretty strongly against the only release notes being JIRA links, etc.
Most consumers of products (even technical products like Kudu) don't want
to parse through technical descriptions. My experience on Hadoop/HDFS is
that developers aren't good at deciding when to fill in the 'Release Note'
field and even when they do, the automated queries that pull the info end
up producing documents with poor organization that aren't very useful to
users.
I _do_ like the idea of using a 'release notes' field on JIRA or at least a
'Needs release notes' field, so that we can quickly double check when
preparing a release that everything that should have been noted was.
What's the concern about "predicted ahead of time"? Perhaps we can publish
the 'next-version' docs with a header saying "These release notes are
work-in-progress for Kudu 0.7.2, which has not yet been released." by means
of a special build-time flag? This is what LLVM does, for example:
http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html
As a consumer of LLVM I appreciate that I can view this page (whose URL
never changes) to see what's coming down the pipe. This encourages me to
try out release candidates (or even trunk builds) when I see new features
or bug fixes that are relevant.
-Todd
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I talked more to Todd offline, for 0.8.0 we'll try our best to have
> release
> > notes to be in a releasable format so that it's easy to get them in
> before
> > cutting an RC.
> >
> > For 0.7.1 I'm asking for a free pass OR we sink it right away, push the
> > release notes ASAP, and roll out a new RC with a 24h voting period.
> >
> > J-D
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Our release notes come bundled with the source package. In this case
> our
> > > notes are there in docs/ but it seems strange to only have 0.7.0
> relnotes
> > > in a 0.7.1 release tarball.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > > > On Mar 4, 2016, at 6:21 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I feel strongly against having to have the release notes updated on
> the
> > > > website before being able to roll out an RC. It always takes at least
> > one
> > > > day to get reviews for that, more on big releases. Then, following
> RCs
> > > > might also need to have the notes updated, which delays things even
> > more.
> > > >
> > > > If folks care about having some minimal form of release notes, we can
> > do
> > > > something similar to what HBase does:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/CHANGES.txt
> > > >
> > > > J-D
> > > >
> > > >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Perhaps we can keep voting on this release, finish up the release
> > notes
> > > >> today, and have a quick turnaround on rc2? I imagine if the diff
> > between
> > > >> the tags is only in the docs/ directory, we can get the voting done
> > in a
> > > >> couple hours (just verify the sha/signature, no need to rebuild and
> > > retest
> > > >> if the code is identical)
> > > >>
> > > >> -Todd
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> > jdcryans@apache.org
> > > >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Just planning on pushing them to the website when 0.7.1 is
> > available..
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Or maybe what you're saying is that you're already planning for an
> > > RC2.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I'm a little confused about this. So you're saying that we won't
> > > >>> include
> > > >>>>> release notes in the source artifact for the release? That seems
> > > >> pretty
> > > >>>>> atypical.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Mike
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> > > >>> jdcryans@gmail.com>
> > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Yeah was planning on casually doing that. My gripe with release
> > > >> notes
> > > >>> is
> > > >>>>>> that they take time to write and review, delaying an RC by days
> if
> > > >> we
> > > >>>> were
> > > >>>>>> to wait for them to be written before releasing it.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Should we edit docs/release_notes.adoc to include release notes
> > > >> for
> > > >>>>>> 0.7.1
> > > >>>>>>> before releasing? It seems odd that the release wouldn't
> mention
> > > >> the
> > > >>>>>> latest
> > > >>>>>>> version in the included release notes.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> -Todd
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> > > >>>> jdcryans@apache.org
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> Hi,
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache
> > > >>> Kudu
> > > >>>>>>>> (incubating) 0.7.1.
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> This release fixes a few important bugs found during the
> process
> > > >>> of
> > > >>>>>>>> releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It
> > > >> also
> > > >>>>>> takes
> > > >>>>>>>> care of fixing some licenses.
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
> > > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> It was built from this tag:
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> KEYS file:
> > > >>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and
> running
> > > >>> the
> > > >>>>>> unit
> > > >>>>>>>> tests.
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at
> least
> > > >> 72
> > > >>>>>> hours.
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> J-D
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>> Todd Lipcon
> > > >>>>>>> Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Todd Lipcon
> > > >> Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
--
Todd Lipcon
Software Engineer, Cloudera
Re: [VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Posted by Misty Stanley-Jones <ms...@cloudera.com>.
There is a chicken-and-egg problem here. The solution may be that the only
'release notes' we have for a patch release like this are links to the JIRA
query and the Github tags which will show the changes. Those two URLs can
be predicted ahead of time and will still work even if we have to go
through multiple RCs. This helps us to stick to not introducing new
features or incompatible changes in patch releases, since we would have no
mechanism to document them. We can also add a Release Notes field to JIRA
so that people can see a draft of the release note for a given issue before
it is even part of a release.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
wrote:
> I talked more to Todd offline, for 0.8.0 we'll try our best to have release
> notes to be in a releasable format so that it's easy to get them in before
> cutting an RC.
>
> For 0.7.1 I'm asking for a free pass OR we sink it right away, push the
> release notes ASAP, and roll out a new RC with a 24h voting period.
>
> J-D
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Our release notes come bundled with the source package. In this case our
> > notes are there in docs/ but it seems strange to only have 0.7.0 relnotes
> > in a 0.7.1 release tarball.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On Mar 4, 2016, at 6:21 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I feel strongly against having to have the release notes updated on the
> > > website before being able to roll out an RC. It always takes at least
> one
> > > day to get reviews for that, more on big releases. Then, following RCs
> > > might also need to have the notes updated, which delays things even
> more.
> > >
> > > If folks care about having some minimal form of release notes, we can
> do
> > > something similar to what HBase does:
> > > https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/CHANGES.txt
> > >
> > > J-D
> > >
> > >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Perhaps we can keep voting on this release, finish up the release
> notes
> > >> today, and have a quick turnaround on rc2? I imagine if the diff
> between
> > >> the tags is only in the docs/ directory, we can get the voting done
> in a
> > >> couple hours (just verify the sha/signature, no need to rebuild and
> > retest
> > >> if the code is identical)
> > >>
> > >> -Todd
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> jdcryans@apache.org
> > >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Just planning on pushing them to the website when 0.7.1 is
> available..
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Or maybe what you're saying is that you're already planning for an
> > RC2.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I'm a little confused about this. So you're saying that we won't
> > >>> include
> > >>>>> release notes in the source artifact for the release? That seems
> > >> pretty
> > >>>>> atypical.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Mike
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> > >>> jdcryans@gmail.com>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Yeah was planning on casually doing that. My gripe with release
> > >> notes
> > >>> is
> > >>>>>> that they take time to write and review, delaying an RC by days if
> > >> we
> > >>>> were
> > >>>>>> to wait for them to be written before releasing it.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Should we edit docs/release_notes.adoc to include release notes
> > >> for
> > >>>>>> 0.7.1
> > >>>>>>> before releasing? It seems odd that the release wouldn't mention
> > >> the
> > >>>>>> latest
> > >>>>>>> version in the included release notes.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> -Todd
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> > >>>> jdcryans@apache.org
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache
> > >>> Kudu
> > >>>>>>>> (incubating) 0.7.1.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process
> > >>> of
> > >>>>>>>> releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It
> > >> also
> > >>>>>> takes
> > >>>>>>>> care of fixing some licenses.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
> > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> It was built from this tag:
> > >>
> >
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
> > >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> KEYS file:
> > >>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running
> > >>> the
> > >>>>>> unit
> > >>>>>>>> tests.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least
> > >> 72
> > >>>>>> hours.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> J-D
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>> Todd Lipcon
> > >>>>>>> Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Todd Lipcon
> > >> Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > >>
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Posted by Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
wrote:
> For 0.7.1 I'm asking for a free pass OR we sink it right away, push the
> release notes ASAP, and roll out a new RC with a 24h voting period.
>
I'd be +0 on skipping for this release. However it probably means we need a
"docs release" tag so we know where to build the docs from for pushing them
to the site. I'm also +1 for a quick 24h vote on RC2, especially if all we
put in it are docs changes relative to RC1.
Personally I don't think relnotes for a patch release need to be at the
standard of a major release. Just a list of the most important changes is
probably sufficient.
Something else we could do is simply "git rm" the release notes from the
master branch docs and make it a web site-only thing. That fully decouples
it from voting, and maybe it makes life easier for the RM.
Mike
>
> J-D
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Our release notes come bundled with the source package. In this case our
> > notes are there in docs/ but it seems strange to only have 0.7.0 relnotes
> > in a 0.7.1 release tarball.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On Mar 4, 2016, at 6:21 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I feel strongly against having to have the release notes updated on the
> > > website before being able to roll out an RC. It always takes at least
> one
> > > day to get reviews for that, more on big releases. Then, following RCs
> > > might also need to have the notes updated, which delays things even
> more.
> > >
> > > If folks care about having some minimal form of release notes, we can
> do
> > > something similar to what HBase does:
> > > https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/CHANGES.txt
> > >
> > > J-D
> > >
> > >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Perhaps we can keep voting on this release, finish up the release
> notes
> > >> today, and have a quick turnaround on rc2? I imagine if the diff
> between
> > >> the tags is only in the docs/ directory, we can get the voting done
> in a
> > >> couple hours (just verify the sha/signature, no need to rebuild and
> > retest
> > >> if the code is identical)
> > >>
> > >> -Todd
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> jdcryans@apache.org
> > >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Just planning on pushing them to the website when 0.7.1 is
> available..
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Or maybe what you're saying is that you're already planning for an
> > RC2.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I'm a little confused about this. So you're saying that we won't
> > >>> include
> > >>>>> release notes in the source artifact for the release? That seems
> > >> pretty
> > >>>>> atypical.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Mike
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> > >>> jdcryans@gmail.com>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Yeah was planning on casually doing that. My gripe with release
> > >> notes
> > >>> is
> > >>>>>> that they take time to write and review, delaying an RC by days if
> > >> we
> > >>>> were
> > >>>>>> to wait for them to be written before releasing it.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Should we edit docs/release_notes.adoc to include release notes
> > >> for
> > >>>>>> 0.7.1
> > >>>>>>> before releasing? It seems odd that the release wouldn't mention
> > >> the
> > >>>>>> latest
> > >>>>>>> version in the included release notes.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> -Todd
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> > >>>> jdcryans@apache.org
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache
> > >>> Kudu
> > >>>>>>>> (incubating) 0.7.1.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process
> > >>> of
> > >>>>>>>> releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It
> > >> also
> > >>>>>> takes
> > >>>>>>>> care of fixing some licenses.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
> > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> It was built from this tag:
> > >>
> >
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
> > >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> KEYS file:
> > >>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running
> > >>> the
> > >>>>>> unit
> > >>>>>>>> tests.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least
> > >> 72
> > >>>>>> hours.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> J-D
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>> Todd Lipcon
> > >>>>>>> Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Todd Lipcon
> > >> Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > >>
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Posted by Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>.
I talked more to Todd offline, for 0.8.0 we'll try our best to have release
notes to be in a releasable format so that it's easy to get them in before
cutting an RC.
For 0.7.1 I'm asking for a free pass OR we sink it right away, push the
release notes ASAP, and roll out a new RC with a 24h voting period.
J-D
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> Our release notes come bundled with the source package. In this case our
> notes are there in docs/ but it seems strange to only have 0.7.0 relnotes
> in a 0.7.1 release tarball.
>
> Mike
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Mar 4, 2016, at 6:21 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > I feel strongly against having to have the release notes updated on the
> > website before being able to roll out an RC. It always takes at least one
> > day to get reviews for that, more on big releases. Then, following RCs
> > might also need to have the notes updated, which delays things even more.
> >
> > If folks care about having some minimal form of release notes, we can do
> > something similar to what HBase does:
> > https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/CHANGES.txt
> >
> > J-D
> >
> >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Perhaps we can keep voting on this release, finish up the release notes
> >> today, and have a quick turnaround on rc2? I imagine if the diff between
> >> the tags is only in the docs/ directory, we can get the voting done in a
> >> couple hours (just verify the sha/signature, no need to rebuild and
> retest
> >> if the code is identical)
> >>
> >> -Todd
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcryans@apache.org
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Just planning on pushing them to the website when 0.7.1 is available..
> >>>
> >>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Or maybe what you're saying is that you're already planning for an
> RC2.
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm a little confused about this. So you're saying that we won't
> >>> include
> >>>>> release notes in the source artifact for the release? That seems
> >> pretty
> >>>>> atypical.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Mike
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> >>> jdcryans@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Yeah was planning on casually doing that. My gripe with release
> >> notes
> >>> is
> >>>>>> that they take time to write and review, delaying an RC by days if
> >> we
> >>>> were
> >>>>>> to wait for them to be written before releasing it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Should we edit docs/release_notes.adoc to include release notes
> >> for
> >>>>>> 0.7.1
> >>>>>>> before releasing? It seems odd that the release wouldn't mention
> >> the
> >>>>>> latest
> >>>>>>> version in the included release notes.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -Todd
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> >>>> jdcryans@apache.org
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache
> >>> Kudu
> >>>>>>>> (incubating) 0.7.1.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process
> >>> of
> >>>>>>>> releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It
> >> also
> >>>>>> takes
> >>>>>>>> care of fixing some licenses.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
> >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It was built from this tag:
> >>
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> KEYS file:
> >>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running
> >>> the
> >>>>>> unit
> >>>>>>>> tests.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least
> >> 72
> >>>>>> hours.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> J-D
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Todd Lipcon
> >>>>>>> Software Engineer, Cloudera
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Todd Lipcon
> >> Software Engineer, Cloudera
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Posted by Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org>.
Our release notes come bundled with the source package. In this case our notes are there in docs/ but it seems strange to only have 0.7.0 relnotes in a 0.7.1 release tarball.
Mike
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 4, 2016, at 6:21 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I feel strongly against having to have the release notes updated on the
> website before being able to roll out an RC. It always takes at least one
> day to get reviews for that, more on big releases. Then, following RCs
> might also need to have the notes updated, which delays things even more.
>
> If folks care about having some minimal form of release notes, we can do
> something similar to what HBase does:
> https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/CHANGES.txt
>
> J-D
>
>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps we can keep voting on this release, finish up the release notes
>> today, and have a quick turnaround on rc2? I imagine if the diff between
>> the tags is only in the docs/ directory, we can get the voting done in a
>> couple hours (just verify the sha/signature, no need to rebuild and retest
>> if the code is identical)
>>
>> -Todd
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Just planning on pushing them to the website when 0.7.1 is available..
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Or maybe what you're saying is that you're already planning for an RC2.
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm a little confused about this. So you're saying that we won't
>>> include
>>>>> release notes in the source artifact for the release? That seems
>> pretty
>>>>> atypical.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
>>> jdcryans@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah was planning on casually doing that. My gripe with release
>> notes
>>> is
>>>>>> that they take time to write and review, delaying an RC by days if
>> we
>>>> were
>>>>>> to wait for them to be written before releasing it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Should we edit docs/release_notes.adoc to include release notes
>> for
>>>>>> 0.7.1
>>>>>>> before releasing? It seems odd that the release wouldn't mention
>> the
>>>>>> latest
>>>>>>> version in the included release notes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Todd
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
>>>> jdcryans@apache.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache
>>> Kudu
>>>>>>>> (incubating) 0.7.1.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process
>>> of
>>>>>>>> releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It
>> also
>>>>>> takes
>>>>>>>> care of fixing some licenses.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It was built from this tag:
>> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> KEYS file:
>>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running
>>> the
>>>>>> unit
>>>>>>>> tests.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least
>> 72
>>>>>> hours.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> J-D
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Todd Lipcon
>>>>>>> Software Engineer, Cloudera
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Todd Lipcon
>> Software Engineer, Cloudera
>>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Posted by Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>.
I feel strongly against having to have the release notes updated on the
website before being able to roll out an RC. It always takes at least one
day to get reviews for that, more on big releases. Then, following RCs
might also need to have the notes updated, which delays things even more.
If folks care about having some minimal form of release notes, we can do
something similar to what HBase does:
https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/CHANGES.txt
J-D
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> Perhaps we can keep voting on this release, finish up the release notes
> today, and have a quick turnaround on rc2? I imagine if the diff between
> the tags is only in the docs/ directory, we can get the voting done in a
> couple hours (just verify the sha/signature, no need to rebuild and retest
> if the code is identical)
>
> -Todd
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Just planning on pushing them to the website when 0.7.1 is available..
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Or maybe what you're saying is that you're already planning for an RC2.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm a little confused about this. So you're saying that we won't
> > include
> > > > release notes in the source artifact for the release? That seems
> pretty
> > > > atypical.
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> > jdcryans@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Yeah was planning on casually doing that. My gripe with release
> notes
> > is
> > > >> that they take time to write and review, delaying an RC by days if
> we
> > > were
> > > >> to wait for them to be written before releasing it.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Should we edit docs/release_notes.adoc to include release notes
> for
> > > >> 0.7.1
> > > >> > before releasing? It seems odd that the release wouldn't mention
> the
> > > >> latest
> > > >> > version in the included release notes.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > -Todd
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> > > jdcryans@apache.org
> > > >> >
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Hi,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache
> > Kudu
> > > >> > > (incubating) 0.7.1.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process
> > of
> > > >> > > releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It
> also
> > > >> takes
> > > >> > > care of fixing some licenses.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
> > > >> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > It was built from this tag:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > KEYS file:
> > > >> > > http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running
> > the
> > > >> unit
> > > >> > > tests.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least
> 72
> > > >> hours.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Thanks,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > J-D
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >> > Todd Lipcon
> > > >> > Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Todd Lipcon
> Software Engineer, Cloudera
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Posted by Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com>.
Perhaps we can keep voting on this release, finish up the release notes
today, and have a quick turnaround on rc2? I imagine if the diff between
the tags is only in the docs/ directory, we can get the voting done in a
couple hours (just verify the sha/signature, no need to rebuild and retest
if the code is identical)
-Todd
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Just planning on pushing them to the website when 0.7.1 is available..
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Or maybe what you're saying is that you're already planning for an RC2.
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm a little confused about this. So you're saying that we won't
> include
> > > release notes in the source artifact for the release? That seems pretty
> > > atypical.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> jdcryans@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Yeah was planning on casually doing that. My gripe with release notes
> is
> > >> that they take time to write and review, delaying an RC by days if we
> > were
> > >> to wait for them to be written before releasing it.
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Should we edit docs/release_notes.adoc to include release notes for
> > >> 0.7.1
> > >> > before releasing? It seems odd that the release wouldn't mention the
> > >> latest
> > >> > version in the included release notes.
> > >> >
> > >> > -Todd
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> > jdcryans@apache.org
> > >> >
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Hi,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache
> Kudu
> > >> > > (incubating) 0.7.1.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process
> of
> > >> > > releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It also
> > >> takes
> > >> > > care of fixing some licenses.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
> > >> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
> > >> > >
> > >> > > It was built from this tag:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
> > >> > >
> > >> > > KEYS file:
> > >> > > http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running
> the
> > >> unit
> > >> > > tests.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least 72
> > >> hours.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Thanks,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > J-D
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Todd Lipcon
> > >> > Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
--
Todd Lipcon
Software Engineer, Cloudera
Re: [VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Posted by Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>.
Just planning on pushing them to the website when 0.7.1 is available..
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> Or maybe what you're saying is that you're already planning for an RC2.
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I'm a little confused about this. So you're saying that we won't include
> > release notes in the source artifact for the release? That seems pretty
> > atypical.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Yeah was planning on casually doing that. My gripe with release notes is
> >> that they take time to write and review, delaying an RC by days if we
> were
> >> to wait for them to be written before releasing it.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Should we edit docs/release_notes.adoc to include release notes for
> >> 0.7.1
> >> > before releasing? It seems odd that the release wouldn't mention the
> >> latest
> >> > version in the included release notes.
> >> >
> >> > -Todd
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
> jdcryans@apache.org
> >> >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi,
> >> > >
> >> > > We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache Kudu
> >> > > (incubating) 0.7.1.
> >> > >
> >> > > This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process of
> >> > > releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It also
> >> takes
> >> > > care of fixing some licenses.
> >> > >
> >> > > The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
> >> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
> >> > >
> >> > > It was built from this tag:
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
> >> > >
> >> > > The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
> >> > >
> >> > > KEYS file:
> >> > > http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
> >> > >
> >> > > I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running the
> >> unit
> >> > > tests.
> >> > >
> >> > > Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least 72
> >> hours.
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > >
> >> > > J-D
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Todd Lipcon
> >> > Software Engineer, Cloudera
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Posted by Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org>.
Or maybe what you're saying is that you're already planning for an RC2.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm a little confused about this. So you're saying that we won't include
> release notes in the source artifact for the release? That seems pretty
> atypical.
>
> Mike
>
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Yeah was planning on casually doing that. My gripe with release notes is
>> that they take time to write and review, delaying an RC by days if we were
>> to wait for them to be written before releasing it.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Should we edit docs/release_notes.adoc to include release notes for
>> 0.7.1
>> > before releasing? It seems odd that the release wouldn't mention the
>> latest
>> > version in the included release notes.
>> >
>> > -Todd
>> >
>> > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcryans@apache.org
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache Kudu
>> > > (incubating) 0.7.1.
>> > >
>> > > This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process of
>> > > releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It also
>> takes
>> > > care of fixing some licenses.
>> > >
>> > > The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
>> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
>> > >
>> > > It was built from this tag:
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
>> > >
>> > > The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
>> > >
>> > > KEYS file:
>> > > http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
>> > >
>> > > I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running the
>> unit
>> > > tests.
>> > >
>> > > Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least 72
>> hours.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > >
>> > > J-D
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Todd Lipcon
>> > Software Engineer, Cloudera
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Posted by Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org>.
I'm a little confused about this. So you're saying that we won't include
release notes in the source artifact for the release? That seems pretty
atypical.
Mike
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Yeah was planning on casually doing that. My gripe with release notes is
> that they take time to write and review, delaying an RC by days if we were
> to wait for them to be written before releasing it.
>
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > Should we edit docs/release_notes.adoc to include release notes for 0.7.1
> > before releasing? It seems odd that the release wouldn't mention the
> latest
> > version in the included release notes.
> >
> > -Todd
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache Kudu
> > > (incubating) 0.7.1.
> > >
> > > This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process of
> > > releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It also takes
> > > care of fixing some licenses.
> > >
> > > The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
> > >
> > > It was built from this tag:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
> > >
> > > The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
> > >
> > > KEYS file:
> > > http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
> > >
> > > I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running the
> unit
> > > tests.
> > >
> > > Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least 72
> hours.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > J-D
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Todd Lipcon
> > Software Engineer, Cloudera
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Posted by Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@gmail.com>.
Yeah was planning on casually doing that. My gripe with release notes is
that they take time to write and review, delaying an RC by days if we were
to wait for them to be written before releasing it.
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> Should we edit docs/release_notes.adoc to include release notes for 0.7.1
> before releasing? It seems odd that the release wouldn't mention the latest
> version in the included release notes.
>
> -Todd
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache Kudu
> > (incubating) 0.7.1.
> >
> > This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process of
> > releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It also takes
> > care of fixing some licenses.
> >
> > The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
> >
> > It was built from this tag:
> >
> >
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
> >
> > The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
> >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
> >
> > KEYS file:
> > http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
> >
> > I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running the unit
> > tests.
> >
> > Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > J-D
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Todd Lipcon
> Software Engineer, Cloudera
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Kudu (incubating) 0.7.1 RC1
Posted by Todd Lipcon <to...@cloudera.com>.
Should we edit docs/release_notes.adoc to include release notes for 0.7.1
before releasing? It seems odd that the release wouldn't mention the latest
version in the included release notes.
-Todd
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We're happy to announce the first release candidate for Apache Kudu
> (incubating) 0.7.1.
>
> This release fixes a few important bugs found during the process of
> releasing 0.7.0 that didn't warrant sinking the vote for. It also takes
> care of fixing some licenses.
>
> The is a source-only release. The artifacts were staged here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/kudu/0.7.1-RC1/
>
> It was built from this tag:
>
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-kudu.git;a=commit;h=bd191ec7366e13c3a11c6144f3b5af03d6496b38
>
> The list of all issues fixed can be found here:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KUDU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.7.1
>
> KEYS file:
> http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/kudu/KEYS
>
> I'd suggest going through the README, building Kudu, and running the unit
> tests.
>
> Please try the release and vote; vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
> Thanks,
>
> J-D
>
--
Todd Lipcon
Software Engineer, Cloudera