You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Jun Liu <li...@apache.org> on 2018/09/03 02:32:22 UTC

[VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Hello All,

This is a call for vote to release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) version 2.6.3.

The Apache Dubbo community has voted on and approved a proposal to release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) version 2.6.3.

We now kindly request the Incubator PMC members review and vote on this incubator release.

Apache Dubbo™ (incubating) is a high-performance, java based, open source RPC framework. Dubbo offers three key functionalities, which include interface based remote call, fault tolerance & load balancing, and automatic service registration & discovery. 

Dubbo community vote and result thread:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/fdbb88c98d149c7bcefe9709316350c1d1f95463fad3e6148c63c05d@%3Cdev.dubbo.apache.org%3E

The release candidates:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/dubbo/2.6.3

Git tag for the release:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/tree/dubbo-2.6.3

Hash for the release tag:
6ce7b11f982c5f7beb2ac5897fb33d48da357ada

Release Notes:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/blob/dubbo-2.6.3/CHANGES.md

The artifacts have been signed with Key : 28681CB1, which can be found in the keys file:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/dubbo/KEYS

Look at here for how to verify this release candidate:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo-website/blob/asf-site/blog/en-us/prepare-an-apache-release.md#prepare-apache-release

The vote will be open for at least 72 hours or until necessary number of votes are reached.

Please vote accordingly:
[ ] +1 approve 
[ ] +0 no opinion 
[ ] -1 disapprove with the reason


Best regards,
Jun

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Huxing Zhang <hu...@apache.org>.
Hi community,

We have 2 binding votes, still need one vote to pass.

Would you please kindly help to check and vote for it?

On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM Jun Liu <li...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> This is a call for vote to release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) version 2.6.3.
>
> The Apache Dubbo community has voted on and approved a proposal to release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) version 2.6.3.
>
> We now kindly request the Incubator PMC members review and vote on this incubator release.
>
> Apache Dubbo™ (incubating) is a high-performance, java based, open source RPC framework. Dubbo offers three key functionalities, which include interface based remote call, fault tolerance & load balancing, and automatic service registration & discovery.
>
> Dubbo community vote and result thread:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/fdbb88c98d149c7bcefe9709316350c1d1f95463fad3e6148c63c05d@%3Cdev.dubbo.apache.org%3E
>
> The release candidates:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/dubbo/2.6.3
>
> Git tag for the release:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/tree/dubbo-2.6.3
>
> Hash for the release tag:
> 6ce7b11f982c5f7beb2ac5897fb33d48da357ada
>
> Release Notes:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/blob/dubbo-2.6.3/CHANGES.md
>
> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 28681CB1, which can be found in the keys file:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/dubbo/KEYS
>
> Look at here for how to verify this release candidate:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo-website/blob/asf-site/blog/en-us/prepare-an-apache-release.md#prepare-apache-release
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours or until necessary number of votes are reached.
>
> Please vote accordingly:
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason
>
>
> Best regards,
> Jun
>


-- 
Best Regards！
Huxing

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: NOTICE file enhancement

Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,

Btw the source bundle does include Netty code.
So it's not just the binary that needs it.

Thanks
Justin

Re: NOTICE file enhancement

Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,

The link provided is not that useful as  it doesn't take into consideration
ASF policy on licensed and notice files. I suggest you read [1].

IMO it does need to be included.

Thanks,
Justin

1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice

Re: NOTICE file enhancement

Posted by Huxing Zhang <hu...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 2:37 PM Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> All mostly correct and I’ve clarified a few things where needed.
>
> > Because the bundled Google Guava and Netty both contain no bundled
> > subcomponents under other licenses
>
> Well Netty does contain 3rd party bundled sub component but it incorrectly list then in NOTICE not LICENSE. I don't think you include any of these however.
>
> > Because Netty does supply a NOTICE file, and it is Apache licensed, we
> > should analyze whether we should modify NOTICE file.
>
> Yes.
>
> > According to "MODIFICATIONS TO NOTICE",  because Dubbo has relocated
> > several classes from Netty, and these files contain copyright notice,
> > we must modify NOTICE file to add Netty copyright notifications and
> > then change the source file header to remove the copyright notice.
>
> Relocated copyright are those where the copyright in the header has been removed with permission, usually as part of a software grant [1], that’s not the case here.
>
> > That is my understanding of why we should add Netty's copyright notice
> > to NOTICE file.
>
> Close, but it's because it’s in the their NOTICE file and the contain of that NOTICE file (that are needed) need to be carried over.
>
> > 1. The source file header of classes under
> > org.apache.dubbo.common.threadlocal should be changed by removing the
> > copyright Notice from Netty.
>
> Please don’t. Never remove or modify headers from 3rd party files unless you have explicit permission from them to do so. [2]

So does that mean it is safe to keep the copyright notice as long as
we add it to NOTICE file?

>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> 1. https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers
> 2. https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party
>


-- 
Best Regards！
Huxing

Re: NOTICE file enhancement

Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,

All mostly correct and I’ve clarified a few things where needed.

> Because the bundled Google Guava and Netty both contain no bundled
> subcomponents under other licenses

Well Netty does contain 3rd party bundled sub component but it incorrectly list then in NOTICE not LICENSE. I don't think you include any of these however.

> Because Netty does supply a NOTICE file, and it is Apache licensed, we
> should analyze whether we should modify NOTICE file.

Yes.

> According to "MODIFICATIONS TO NOTICE",  because Dubbo has relocated
> several classes from Netty, and these files contain copyright notice,
> we must modify NOTICE file to add Netty copyright notifications and
> then change the source file header to remove the copyright notice.

Relocated copyright are those where the copyright in the header has been removed with permission, usually as part of a software grant [1], that’s not the case here.

> That is my understanding of why we should add Netty's copyright notice
> to NOTICE file.

Close, but it's because it’s in the their NOTICE file and the contain of that NOTICE file (that are needed) need to be carried over.

> 1. The source file header of classes under
> org.apache.dubbo.common.threadlocal should be changed by removing the
> copyright Notice from Netty.

Please don’t. Never remove or modify headers from 3rd party files unless you have explicit permission from them to do so. [2]

Thanks,
Justin

1. https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers
2. https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party

Re: NOTICE file enhancement

Posted by Huxing Zhang <hu...@apache.org>.
Hi,

I have read the official document[1] for several times, and actually I
found it difficult to understand for me. :(
I would like to elaborate it with my limited understanding, and please
correct me if I am wrong.

First, according to the "GUIDING PRINCIPLE":

> The LICENSE and NOTICE files must exactly represent the contents of the distribution they reside in.
> Only bits that are actually included in a distribution have any bearing on the content of NOTICE and LICENSE.

ASF only do source releases, so there should not be any binary
contents inside the source release.

Secondly, because Dubbo bundles Google Guava and Netty in the source
release, they should be taken into consideration to for possible
change of NOTICE and LICENSE when doing release.

Because Google Guava and Netty both are under ALv2, according to
"BUNDLING AN APACHE-2.0-LICENSED DEPENDENCY"

> Assuming once again that that the bundled dependency itself contains no bundled subcomponents under other licenses and thus the ALv2 applies uniformly to all files, there is no need to modify LICENSE. However, for completeness it is useful to list the products and their versions, as is done for products under other licenses.
> If the dependency supplies a NOTICE file, its contents must be analyzed and the relevant portions bubbled up into the top-level NOTICE file.

Because the bundled Google Guava and Netty both contain no bundled
subcomponents under other licenses, normally we should not modify
LICENSE. But for completeness we list them and their version.

Because Google Guava does not supply a NOTICE file, and the source
file headers have no copyright notice, there is no need to modify
NOTICE for Google Guava.

Because Netty does supply a NOTICE file, and it is Apache licensed, we
should analyze whether we should modify NOTICE file.

According to "MODIFICATIONS TO NOTICE",  because Dubbo has relocated
several classes from Netty, and these files contain copyright notice,
we must modify NOTICE file to add Netty copyright notifications and
then change the source file header to remove the copyright notice.

That is my understanding of why we should add Netty's copyright notice
to NOTICE file.

When I was going through the files, I found there are something we
still need to be improved:

1. The source file header of classes under
org.apache.dubbo.common.threadlocal should be changed by removing the
copyright Notice from Netty.
2. Update LICESE file: Remove the
io.netty.util.concurrent.FastThreadLocal class, which is no longer
bundled in Dubbo.

I am planning to update them to 2.7.x branch and 2.6.x branch, and it
should be available in next release.



[1] http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 9:32 PM Willem Ning Jiang <ni...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Justin,
>
> Just a quick question for adding the NOTICE file, if we just use netty binary file, do we still need to add the NOTICE about the copyright of netty?
>
> According this[1], I don't think we need to add NOTICE information for the binary usage of Netty.
>
> [1]https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/234511/what-is-the-best-practice-for-arranging-third-party-library-licenses-paperwork
>
> Regards,
>
> Willem
>
> On 2018/09/08 01:34:36, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > >>> This product contains code derived from Google Guava project, which is
> > >>> available under a "Apache License 2.0" license.
> > >>> (https://github.com/google/guava <https://github.com/google/guava>).
> > >>>
> > >>> This product contains code derived from the Netty Project, which is
> > >>> available under a "Apache License 2.0" license.
> > >>> (https://github.com/netty/netty <https://github.com/netty/netty>)
> >
> > First off license information should not be repeated in NOTICE [1], it belongs in LICENSE and there no need to add URLs in NOTICE to repo unless it is specified in the license conditions (so called required 3rd-party notices). [2]
> >
> > The Guava project doesn’t have a NOTICE file so nothing needs to be added for it.
> >
> > The Netty project has a long (and sadly IMO malformed) NOTICE file.
> >
> > I would suggest you just add:
> >
> > "This product contains code form the Netty Project:
> >
> > The Netty Project
> > =================
> > Please visit the Netty web site for more information:
> >   * http://netty.io/
> >
> > Copyright 2014 The Netty Project”
> >
> > Normally I would not add the URL but as they have it in their NOTICE file we should include it. [3]
> >
> > Also double check if any of the code copies from Netty is from anything mentioned further down in Netty’s NOTICE file. If it is we would need to add more to the NOTICE file.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Justin
> >
> > 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
> > 2. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices
> > 3. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep
> >
> >



-- 
Best Regards！
Huxing

Re: NOTICE file enhancement

Posted by Willem Ning Jiang <ni...@apache.org>.
Hi Justin,

Just a quick question for adding the NOTICE file, if we just use netty binary file, do we still need to add the NOTICE about the copyright of netty?

According this[1], I don't think we need to add NOTICE information for the binary usage of Netty.

[1]https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/234511/what-is-the-best-practice-for-arranging-third-party-library-licenses-paperwork

Regards,

Willem

On 2018/09/08 01:34:36, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote: 
> Hi,
> 
> >>> This product contains code derived from Google Guava project, which is
> >>> available under a "Apache License 2.0" license.
> >>> (https://github.com/google/guava <https://github.com/google/guava>).
> >>> 
> >>> This product contains code derived from the Netty Project, which is
> >>> available under a "Apache License 2.0" license.
> >>> (https://github.com/netty/netty <https://github.com/netty/netty>)
> 
> First off license information should not be repeated in NOTICE [1], it belongs in LICENSE and there no need to add URLs in NOTICE to repo unless it is specified in the license conditions (so called required 3rd-party notices). [2]
> 
> The Guava project doesn’t have a NOTICE file so nothing needs to be added for it.
> 
> The Netty project has a long (and sadly IMO malformed) NOTICE file.
> 
> I would suggest you just add:
> 
> "This product contains code form the Netty Project:
> 
> The Netty Project
> =================
> Please visit the Netty web site for more information:
>   * http://netty.io/
> 
> Copyright 2014 The Netty Project”
> 
> Normally I would not add the URL but as they have it in their NOTICE file we should include it. [3]
> 
> Also double check if any of the code copies from Netty is from anything mentioned further down in Netty’s NOTICE file. If it is we would need to add more to the NOTICE file.
> 
> Thanks,
> Justin
> 
> 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
> 2. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices
> 3. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep
> 
>

Re: NOTICE file enhancement

Posted by Huxing Zhang <hu...@apache.org>.
Hi,

On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 9:34 AM Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> >>> This product contains code derived from Google Guava project, which is
> >>> available under a "Apache License 2.0" license.
> >>> (https://github.com/google/guava <https://github.com/google/guava>).
> >>>
> >>> This product contains code derived from the Netty Project, which is
> >>> available under a "Apache License 2.0" license.
> >>> (https://github.com/netty/netty <https://github.com/netty/netty>)
>
> First off license information should not be repeated in NOTICE [1], it belongs in LICENSE and there no need to add URLs in NOTICE to repo unless it is specified in the license conditions (so called required 3rd-party notices). [2]
>
> The Guava project doesn’t have a NOTICE file so nothing needs to be added for it.
>
> The Netty project has a long (and sadly IMO malformed) NOTICE file.
>
> I would suggest you just add:
>
> "This product contains code form the Netty Project:
>
> The Netty Project
> =================
> Please visit the Netty web site for more information:
>   * http://netty.io/
>
> Copyright 2014 The Netty Project”

I have committed the above content to master and 2.6.4-release.

>
> Normally I would not add the URL but as they have it in their NOTICE file we should include it. [3]
>
> Also double check if any of the code copies from Netty is from anything mentioned further down in Netty’s NOTICE file. If it is we would need to add more to the NOTICE file.

I also checked that the code copies from Netty is not listed in
Netty’s NOTICE file.

>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
> 2. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices
> 3. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep
>


-- 
Best Regards！
Huxing

Re: NOTICE file enhancement

Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,

>>> This product contains code derived from Google Guava project, which is
>>> available under a "Apache License 2.0" license.
>>> (https://github.com/google/guava <https://github.com/google/guava>).
>>> 
>>> This product contains code derived from the Netty Project, which is
>>> available under a "Apache License 2.0" license.
>>> (https://github.com/netty/netty <https://github.com/netty/netty>)

First off license information should not be repeated in NOTICE [1], it belongs in LICENSE and there no need to add URLs in NOTICE to repo unless it is specified in the license conditions (so called required 3rd-party notices). [2]

The Guava project doesn’t have a NOTICE file so nothing needs to be added for it.

The Netty project has a long (and sadly IMO malformed) NOTICE file.

I would suggest you just add:

"This product contains code form the Netty Project:

The Netty Project
=================
Please visit the Netty web site for more information:
  * http://netty.io/

Copyright 2014 The Netty Project”

Normally I would not add the URL but as they have it in their NOTICE file we should include it. [3]

Also double check if any of the code copies from Netty is from anything mentioned further down in Netty’s NOTICE file. If it is we would need to add more to the NOTICE file.

Thanks,
Justin

1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
2. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices
3. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep

NOTICE file enhancement

Posted by Huxing Zhang <hu...@apache.org>.
Just bring the discussion on the @dev list

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 4:23 PM Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > This product contains code derived from Google Guava project, which is
> > available under a "Apache License 2.0" license.
> > (https://github.com/google/guava <https://github.com/google/guava>).
> >
> > This product contains code derived from the Netty Project, which is
> > available under a "Apache License 2.0" license.
> > (https://github.com/netty/netty <https://github.com/netty/netty>)
>
> Yes but no :-) I bring it up on the dev list.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin



-- 
Best Regards！
Huxing

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,

> This product contains code derived from Google Guava project, which is
> available under a "Apache License 2.0" license.
> (https://github.com/google/guava <https://github.com/google/guava>).
> 
> This product contains code derived from the Netty Project, which is
> available under a "Apache License 2.0" license.
> (https://github.com/netty/netty <https://github.com/netty/netty>)

Yes but no :-) I bring it up on the dev list.

Thanks,
Justin

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Huxing Zhang <hu...@apache.org>.
Hi,

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 5:02 PM Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> +1 binding
>
> I checked:
> - incubating in name
> - signatures and hashes correct
> - DISCLAIMER exits
> - LICENSE is fine
> - NOTICE may need a little more work (as it is bundling a couple of file from ALv2 license software with NOTICE files) [1]
> - No binary files in release
> - All source files have ASF headers
> - Can compile from source
>
> Re the NOTICE issue I’ll bring it up on the Dubbo dev list. As only a couple of files have been “borrowed” the additions to the NOTICE should be simple and straight forward.

How about adding the following lines:

This product contains code derived from Google Guava project, which is
available under a "Apache License 2.0" license.
(https://github.com/google/guava).

This product contains code derived from the Netty Project, which is
available under a "Apache License 2.0" license.
(https://github.com/netty/netty)


>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> 1.http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>


-- 
Best Regards！
Huxing

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,

+1 binding

I checked:
- incubating in name
- signatures and hashes correct
- DISCLAIMER exits
- LICENSE is fine
- NOTICE may need a little more work (as it is bundling a couple of file from ALv2 license software with NOTICE files) [1]
- No binary files in release
- All source files have ASF headers
- Can compile from source

Re the NOTICE issue I’ll bring it up on the Dubbo dev list. As only a couple of files have been “borrowed” the additions to the NOTICE should be simple and straight forward.

Thanks,
Justin

1.http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Huxing Zhang <hu...@apache.org>.
+1 (non-binding)

* Signatures ok for both source and binary.
* DISCLAIMER, LICENSE and NOTICE ok for both source and binary.
* No SNAPSHOT in source file name or content.
* Unit test passed on Java 8, although still have some unstable UT.
On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM Jun Liu <li...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> This is a call for vote to release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) version 2.6.3.
>
> The Apache Dubbo community has voted on and approved a proposal to release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) version 2.6.3.
>
> We now kindly request the Incubator PMC members review and vote on this incubator release.
>
> Apache Dubbo™ (incubating) is a high-performance, java based, open source RPC framework. Dubbo offers three key functionalities, which include interface based remote call, fault tolerance & load balancing, and automatic service registration & discovery.
>
> Dubbo community vote and result thread:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/fdbb88c98d149c7bcefe9709316350c1d1f95463fad3e6148c63c05d@%3Cdev.dubbo.apache.org%3E
>
> The release candidates:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/dubbo/2.6.3
>
> Git tag for the release:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/tree/dubbo-2.6.3
>
> Hash for the release tag:
> 6ce7b11f982c5f7beb2ac5897fb33d48da357ada
>
> Release Notes:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/blob/dubbo-2.6.3/CHANGES.md
>
> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 28681CB1, which can be found in the keys file:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/dubbo/KEYS
>
> Look at here for how to verify this release candidate:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo-website/blob/asf-site/blog/en-us/prepare-an-apache-release.md#prepare-apache-release
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours or until necessary number of votes are reached.
>
> Please vote accordingly:
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason
>
>
> Best regards,
> Jun
>


--
Best Regards！
Huxing

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Jun Liu <li...@apache.org>.
> Just a quick note for binary release,  it only includes the dubbo
> jars. It could be more convenience for the end user if we can include
> the third party dependencies jars in the binary release.

Yes, this is a point that I have seen some people have also put out in the community, but sadly, there’s still no progress now. I will file an issue to track it later.

BTW, the vote has lasted for 72+ hours and we have received 3 +1(binding) votes. I will announce the pass of this vote in a new email and continue to release.

Best regards,
Jun

> On 9 Sep 2018, at 14:56, Willem Jiang <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Sorry, I just got some time back to this thread.
> I just went through the dev discussion of the dubbo and found out
> dubbo community are planning the next release cut by discussion the
> bug fix list first.  I'm sure we could do it better in the next
> release.
> 
> Here are my +1 for this vote.
> I can build the code from source.
> The artifacts were signed with right key.
> 
> For the UT test error, is only related to system property setting
> which will not effect the end user.
> Just a quick note for binary release,  it only includes the dubbo
> jars. It could be more convenience for the end user if we can include
> the third party dependencies jars in the binary release.
> 
> Willem Jiang
> 
> Twitter: willemjiang
> Weibo: 姜宁willem
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 9:57 AM Jun Liu <li...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> I just checked the commit, it relates to system property setting, the
>>> fix is quite simple.
>>> I also checked the CI build, it looks like the CI is green[1]
>>> 
>>> But my question is this fix was merged into 2.6.x branch for three
>>> weeks ago,  why didn't we do the cherry pick it into 2.6.3 release
>>> branch last week?
>>> In Apache projects we maintain 2~3 different branches at the same
>>> time, cherry pick the fix acrocess different branches is a common
>>> practice.
>> 
>> Thanks for the constructive advice and I agree that check and synchronizing between different branches are one important aspect we should pay more attention to. I will bring this discussion to the dev community to attract more committer’s and contributor’s attention later.
>> 
>> For this specific issue, since it’s a known UT bug, I tend to fix it in the next release and continue with this RC vote.
>> 
>> Saying about UT, I’d like to discuss a little bit more about it here: currently, we have some UTs (3-4 as I know) that are not stable enough themselves, which means they cannot verify features as expected or they may sometimes mis-warn us with failures limited to their own bad logic, and even worse over time, we may be less alert to UT failures. I would suggest we fix these unstable UTs as soon as possible, or at least, if they are not on the schedule now, we should list all these unstable UTs and the possible failures and reasons for failure to reduce the confusion of developers and verifiers.
>> 
>>> I know Dubbo team takes almost 1 month to cut this round release,  but
>>> it's like a pain of growing. ServiceComb took more than a month to cut
>>> the first around release. We can do the release better if we learn
>>> something from it.  Please revisit your release guide and checklist
>>> again, and encourage community to vote -1 once he find something
>>> wrong.
>> 
>> The first release was relatively smooth. But in this release, with all the problems encountered, we have learned that there’re still some things lacking in the community to guarantee regular Apache releases with high quality and efficiency. The Dubbo community has worked on with the following aspects to improve that:
>> * How to prepare an Apache release [1].
>> * The checklist for release candidate [1].
>> * Release script to automate the release process [2].
>> 
>> [1]. http://dubbo.apache.org/en-us/blog/prepare-an-apache-release.html
>> [2]. https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/blob/2.6.x/release.sh
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Jun
>> 
>>> On 6 Sep 2018, at 06:37, Willem Jiang <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I just checked the commit, it relates to system property setting, the
>>> fix is quite simple.
>>> I also checked the CI build, it looks like the CI is green[1]
>>> 
>>> But my question is this fix was merged into 2.6.x branch for three
>>> weeks ago,  why didn't we do the cherry pick it into 2.6.3 release
>>> branch last week?
>>> In Apache projects we maintain 2~3 different branches at the same
>>> time, cherry pick the fix acrocess different branches is a common
>>> practice.
>>> As someone already observered the test failure in earlier RC, we need
>>> to put some efforts on it (issue tracking) to make sure we fix it in
>>> the next RC.
>>> 
>>> I know Dubbo team takes almost 1 month to cut this round release,  but
>>> it's like a pain of growing. ServiceComb took more than a month to cut
>>> the first around release. We can do the release better if we learn
>>> something from it.  Please revisit your release guide and checklist
>>> again, and encourage community to vote -1 once he find something
>>> wrong.
>>> 
>>> [1]https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-dubbo/builds/420912788
>>> 
>>> Willem Jiang
>>> 
>>> Twitter: willemjiang
>>> Weibo: 姜宁willem
>>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:39 PM Jerrick Zhu <je...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:10 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 03/09/18 03:32, Jun Liu wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> <snip/>
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Please vote accordingly:
>>>>>> [X] +1 approve
>>>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason
>>>>> 
>>>>> Notes:
>>>>> ======
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hash and signature match.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Source zip matches Git tag (apart from expected differences of
>>>>> .gitignore and Maven wrapper)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Builds and all tests except one pass.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Issues from previous RC still present in this RC:
>>>>> =================================================
>>>>> 
>>>>> The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
>>>>> hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. New RC
>>>>> not required.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> New issues
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> 
>>>>> Tests seem to expect 127.0.0.2 to be a valid IP. If this is the case,
>>>>> consider documenting the requirements to run the tests somewhere obvious
>>>>> in the source tree. Trivial issue. New RC not required.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I see the following test failures:
>>>>> Oracle Java 8 update 181
>>>>> Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS (fully patched)
>>>>> Maven 3.5.4
>>>>> 
>>>>> This fails consistently for me:
>>>>> 
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
>>>>> 
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Tests run: 38, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.119
>>>>> sec <<< FAILURE! - in com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
>>>>> checkApplication1(com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest)
>>>>> Time elapsed: 0.006 sec  <<< FAILURE!
>>>>> junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<10[0]> but was:<10[]>
>>>>>       at
>>>>> 
>>>>> com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.checkApplication1(AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.java:90)
>>>>> 
>>>>> I note that this test has been observed to fail for other community
>>>>> members in earlier RCs.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Yes, it's true, we've fixed it on 2.6.x branch, and will be in next
>>>> release, 2.6.4, but not in 2.6.3.
>>>> 
>>>> check the commit:
>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/commit/93d2eb674b094ee4feee0ef1e46096098c5a22b4
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> I can recreate this failure on the command line but not in an IDE.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
>>>>> something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> This is the result of mutual influence of unit test cases, not the
>>>> functional problem. So IMO, this release could be go ahead. What do other
>>>> people think?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Mark
>>>>> 
>> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Willem Jiang <wi...@gmail.com>.
Sorry, I just got some time back to this thread.
I just went through the dev discussion of the dubbo and found out
dubbo community are planning the next release cut by discussion the
bug fix list first.  I'm sure we could do it better in the next
release.

Here are my +1 for this vote.
I can build the code from source.
The artifacts were signed with right key.

For the UT test error, is only related to system property setting
which will not effect the end user.
Just a quick note for binary release,  it only includes the dubbo
jars. It could be more convenience for the end user if we can include
the third party dependencies jars in the binary release.

Willem Jiang

Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem
On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 9:57 AM Jun Liu <li...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I just checked the commit, it relates to system property setting, the
> > fix is quite simple.
> > I also checked the CI build, it looks like the CI is green[1]
> >
> > But my question is this fix was merged into 2.6.x branch for three
> > weeks ago,  why didn't we do the cherry pick it into 2.6.3 release
> > branch last week?
> > In Apache projects we maintain 2~3 different branches at the same
> > time, cherry pick the fix acrocess different branches is a common
> > practice.
>
> Thanks for the constructive advice and I agree that check and synchronizing between different branches are one important aspect we should pay more attention to. I will bring this discussion to the dev community to attract more committer’s and contributor’s attention later.
>
> For this specific issue, since it’s a known UT bug, I tend to fix it in the next release and continue with this RC vote.
>
> Saying about UT, I’d like to discuss a little bit more about it here: currently, we have some UTs (3-4 as I know) that are not stable enough themselves, which means they cannot verify features as expected or they may sometimes mis-warn us with failures limited to their own bad logic, and even worse over time, we may be less alert to UT failures. I would suggest we fix these unstable UTs as soon as possible, or at least, if they are not on the schedule now, we should list all these unstable UTs and the possible failures and reasons for failure to reduce the confusion of developers and verifiers.
>
> > I know Dubbo team takes almost 1 month to cut this round release,  but
> > it's like a pain of growing. ServiceComb took more than a month to cut
> > the first around release. We can do the release better if we learn
> > something from it.  Please revisit your release guide and checklist
> > again, and encourage community to vote -1 once he find something
> > wrong.
>
> The first release was relatively smooth. But in this release, with all the problems encountered, we have learned that there’re still some things lacking in the community to guarantee regular Apache releases with high quality and efficiency. The Dubbo community has worked on with the following aspects to improve that:
> * How to prepare an Apache release [1].
> * The checklist for release candidate [1].
> * Release script to automate the release process [2].
>
> [1]. http://dubbo.apache.org/en-us/blog/prepare-an-apache-release.html
> [2]. https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/blob/2.6.x/release.sh
>
> Best regards,
> Jun
>
> > On 6 Sep 2018, at 06:37, Willem Jiang <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I just checked the commit, it relates to system property setting, the
> > fix is quite simple.
> > I also checked the CI build, it looks like the CI is green[1]
> >
> > But my question is this fix was merged into 2.6.x branch for three
> > weeks ago,  why didn't we do the cherry pick it into 2.6.3 release
> > branch last week?
> > In Apache projects we maintain 2~3 different branches at the same
> > time, cherry pick the fix acrocess different branches is a common
> > practice.
> > As someone already observered the test failure in earlier RC, we need
> > to put some efforts on it (issue tracking) to make sure we fix it in
> > the next RC.
> >
> > I know Dubbo team takes almost 1 month to cut this round release,  but
> > it's like a pain of growing. ServiceComb took more than a month to cut
> > the first around release. We can do the release better if we learn
> > something from it.  Please revisit your release guide and checklist
> > again, and encourage community to vote -1 once he find something
> > wrong.
> >
> > [1]https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-dubbo/builds/420912788
> >
> > Willem Jiang
> >
> > Twitter: willemjiang
> > Weibo: 姜宁willem
> > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:39 PM Jerrick Zhu <je...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:10 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 03/09/18 03:32, Jun Liu wrote:
> >>>
> >>> <snip/>
> >>>
> >>>> Please vote accordingly:
> >>>> [X] +1 approve
> >>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
> >>>> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason
> >>>
> >>> Notes:
> >>> ======
> >>>
> >>> Hash and signature match.
> >>>
> >>> Source zip matches Git tag (apart from expected differences of
> >>> .gitignore and Maven wrapper)
> >>>
> >>> Builds and all tests except one pass.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Issues from previous RC still present in this RC:
> >>> =================================================
> >>>
> >>> The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
> >>> hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. New RC
> >>> not required.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> New issues
> >>> ==========
> >>>
> >>> Tests seem to expect 127.0.0.2 to be a valid IP. If this is the case,
> >>> consider documenting the requirements to run the tests somewhere obvious
> >>> in the source tree. Trivial issue. New RC not required.
> >>>
> >>> I see the following test failures:
> >>>  Oracle Java 8 update 181
> >>>  Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS (fully patched)
> >>>  Maven 3.5.4
> >>>
> >>> This fails consistently for me:
> >>>
> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> >>>
> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> Tests run: 38, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.119
> >>> sec <<< FAILURE! - in com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> >>> checkApplication1(com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest)
> >>> Time elapsed: 0.006 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> >>> junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<10[0]> but was:<10[]>
> >>>        at
> >>>
> >>> com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.checkApplication1(AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.java:90)
> >>>
> >>> I note that this test has been observed to fail for other community
> >>> members in earlier RCs.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yes, it's true, we've fixed it on 2.6.x branch, and will be in next
> >> release, 2.6.4, but not in 2.6.3.
> >>
> >> check the commit:
> >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/commit/93d2eb674b094ee4feee0ef1e46096098c5a22b4
> >>
> >>
> >>> I can recreate this failure on the command line but not in an IDE.
> >>>
> >>> Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
> >>> something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.
> >>>
> >>
> >> This is the result of mutual influence of unit test cases, not the
> >> functional problem. So IMO, this release could be go ahead. What do other
> >> people think?
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Mark
> >>>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Jun Liu <li...@apache.org>.
> I just checked the commit, it relates to system property setting, the
> fix is quite simple.
> I also checked the CI build, it looks like the CI is green[1]
> 
> But my question is this fix was merged into 2.6.x branch for three
> weeks ago,  why didn't we do the cherry pick it into 2.6.3 release
> branch last week?
> In Apache projects we maintain 2~3 different branches at the same
> time, cherry pick the fix acrocess different branches is a common
> practice.

Thanks for the constructive advice and I agree that check and synchronizing between different branches are one important aspect we should pay more attention to. I will bring this discussion to the dev community to attract more committer’s and contributor’s attention later.

For this specific issue, since it’s a known UT bug, I tend to fix it in the next release and continue with this RC vote.

Saying about UT, I’d like to discuss a little bit more about it here: currently, we have some UTs (3-4 as I know) that are not stable enough themselves, which means they cannot verify features as expected or they may sometimes mis-warn us with failures limited to their own bad logic, and even worse over time, we may be less alert to UT failures. I would suggest we fix these unstable UTs as soon as possible, or at least, if they are not on the schedule now, we should list all these unstable UTs and the possible failures and reasons for failure to reduce the confusion of developers and verifiers.  

> I know Dubbo team takes almost 1 month to cut this round release,  but
> it's like a pain of growing. ServiceComb took more than a month to cut
> the first around release. We can do the release better if we learn
> something from it.  Please revisit your release guide and checklist
> again, and encourage community to vote -1 once he find something
> wrong.

The first release was relatively smooth. But in this release, with all the problems encountered, we have learned that there’re still some things lacking in the community to guarantee regular Apache releases with high quality and efficiency. The Dubbo community has worked on with the following aspects to improve that: 
* How to prepare an Apache release [1].
* The checklist for release candidate [1].
* Release script to automate the release process [2]. 

[1]. http://dubbo.apache.org/en-us/blog/prepare-an-apache-release.html
[2]. https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/blob/2.6.x/release.sh

Best regards,
Jun

> On 6 Sep 2018, at 06:37, Willem Jiang <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I just checked the commit, it relates to system property setting, the
> fix is quite simple.
> I also checked the CI build, it looks like the CI is green[1]
> 
> But my question is this fix was merged into 2.6.x branch for three
> weeks ago,  why didn't we do the cherry pick it into 2.6.3 release
> branch last week?
> In Apache projects we maintain 2~3 different branches at the same
> time, cherry pick the fix acrocess different branches is a common
> practice.
> As someone already observered the test failure in earlier RC, we need
> to put some efforts on it (issue tracking) to make sure we fix it in
> the next RC.
> 
> I know Dubbo team takes almost 1 month to cut this round release,  but
> it's like a pain of growing. ServiceComb took more than a month to cut
> the first around release. We can do the release better if we learn
> something from it.  Please revisit your release guide and checklist
> again, and encourage community to vote -1 once he find something
> wrong.
> 
> [1]https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-dubbo/builds/420912788
> 
> Willem Jiang
> 
> Twitter: willemjiang
> Weibo: 姜宁willem
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:39 PM Jerrick Zhu <je...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:10 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 03/09/18 03:32, Jun Liu wrote:
>>> 
>>> <snip/>
>>> 
>>>> Please vote accordingly:
>>>> [X] +1 approve
>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason
>>> 
>>> Notes:
>>> ======
>>> 
>>> Hash and signature match.
>>> 
>>> Source zip matches Git tag (apart from expected differences of
>>> .gitignore and Maven wrapper)
>>> 
>>> Builds and all tests except one pass.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Issues from previous RC still present in this RC:
>>> =================================================
>>> 
>>> The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
>>> hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. New RC
>>> not required.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> New issues
>>> ==========
>>> 
>>> Tests seem to expect 127.0.0.2 to be a valid IP. If this is the case,
>>> consider documenting the requirements to run the tests somewhere obvious
>>> in the source tree. Trivial issue. New RC not required.
>>> 
>>> I see the following test failures:
>>>  Oracle Java 8 update 181
>>>  Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS (fully patched)
>>>  Maven 3.5.4
>>> 
>>> This fails consistently for me:
>>> 
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
>>> 
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Tests run: 38, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.119
>>> sec <<< FAILURE! - in com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
>>> checkApplication1(com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest)
>>> Time elapsed: 0.006 sec  <<< FAILURE!
>>> junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<10[0]> but was:<10[]>
>>>        at
>>> 
>>> com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.checkApplication1(AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.java:90)
>>> 
>>> I note that this test has been observed to fail for other community
>>> members in earlier RCs.
>>> 
>> 
>> Yes, it's true, we've fixed it on 2.6.x branch, and will be in next
>> release, 2.6.4, but not in 2.6.3.
>> 
>> check the commit:
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/commit/93d2eb674b094ee4feee0ef1e46096098c5a22b4
>> 
>> 
>>> I can recreate this failure on the command line but not in an IDE.
>>> 
>>> Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
>>> something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.
>>> 
>> 
>> This is the result of mutual influence of unit test cases, not the
>> functional problem. So IMO, this release could be go ahead. What do other
>> people think?
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Mark
>>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Jun Liu <li...@apache.org>.
> I just checked the commit, it relates to system property setting, the
> fix is quite simple.
> I also checked the CI build, it looks like the CI is green[1]
> 
> But my question is this fix was merged into 2.6.x branch for three
> weeks ago,  why didn't we do the cherry pick it into 2.6.3 release
> branch last week?
> In Apache projects we maintain 2~3 different branches at the same
> time, cherry pick the fix acrocess different branches is a common
> practice.

Thanks for the constructive advice and I agree that check and synchronizing between different branches are one important aspect we should pay more attention to. I will bring this discussion to the dev community to attract more committer’s and contributor’s attention later.

For this specific issue, since it’s a known UT bug, I tend to fix it in the next release and continue with this RC vote.

Saying about UT, I’d like to discuss a little bit more about it here: currently, we have some UTs (3-4 as I know) that are not stable enough themselves, which means they cannot verify features as expected or they may sometimes mis-warn us with failures limited to their own bad logic, and even worse over time, we may be less alert to UT failures. I would suggest we fix these unstable UTs as soon as possible, or at least, if they are not on the schedule now, we should list all these unstable UTs and the possible failures and reasons for failure to reduce the confusion of developers and verifiers.  

> I know Dubbo team takes almost 1 month to cut this round release,  but
> it's like a pain of growing. ServiceComb took more than a month to cut
> the first around release. We can do the release better if we learn
> something from it.  Please revisit your release guide and checklist
> again, and encourage community to vote -1 once he find something
> wrong.

The first release was relatively smooth. But in this release, with all the problems encountered, we have learned that there’re still some things lacking in the community to guarantee regular Apache releases with high quality and efficiency. The Dubbo community has worked on with the following aspects to improve that: 
* How to prepare an Apache release [1].
* The checklist for release candidate [1].
* Release script to automate the release process [2]. 

[1]. http://dubbo.apache.org/en-us/blog/prepare-an-apache-release.html
[2]. https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/blob/2.6.x/release.sh

Best regards,
Jun

> On 6 Sep 2018, at 06:37, Willem Jiang <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I just checked the commit, it relates to system property setting, the
> fix is quite simple.
> I also checked the CI build, it looks like the CI is green[1]
> 
> But my question is this fix was merged into 2.6.x branch for three
> weeks ago,  why didn't we do the cherry pick it into 2.6.3 release
> branch last week?
> In Apache projects we maintain 2~3 different branches at the same
> time, cherry pick the fix acrocess different branches is a common
> practice.
> As someone already observered the test failure in earlier RC, we need
> to put some efforts on it (issue tracking) to make sure we fix it in
> the next RC.
> 
> I know Dubbo team takes almost 1 month to cut this round release,  but
> it's like a pain of growing. ServiceComb took more than a month to cut
> the first around release. We can do the release better if we learn
> something from it.  Please revisit your release guide and checklist
> again, and encourage community to vote -1 once he find something
> wrong.
> 
> [1]https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-dubbo/builds/420912788
> 
> Willem Jiang
> 
> Twitter: willemjiang
> Weibo: 姜宁willem
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:39 PM Jerrick Zhu <je...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:10 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 03/09/18 03:32, Jun Liu wrote:
>>> 
>>> <snip/>
>>> 
>>>> Please vote accordingly:
>>>> [X] +1 approve
>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason
>>> 
>>> Notes:
>>> ======
>>> 
>>> Hash and signature match.
>>> 
>>> Source zip matches Git tag (apart from expected differences of
>>> .gitignore and Maven wrapper)
>>> 
>>> Builds and all tests except one pass.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Issues from previous RC still present in this RC:
>>> =================================================
>>> 
>>> The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
>>> hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. New RC
>>> not required.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> New issues
>>> ==========
>>> 
>>> Tests seem to expect 127.0.0.2 to be a valid IP. If this is the case,
>>> consider documenting the requirements to run the tests somewhere obvious
>>> in the source tree. Trivial issue. New RC not required.
>>> 
>>> I see the following test failures:
>>>  Oracle Java 8 update 181
>>>  Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS (fully patched)
>>>  Maven 3.5.4
>>> 
>>> This fails consistently for me:
>>> 
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
>>> 
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Tests run: 38, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.119
>>> sec <<< FAILURE! - in com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
>>> checkApplication1(com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest)
>>> Time elapsed: 0.006 sec  <<< FAILURE!
>>> junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<10[0]> but was:<10[]>
>>>        at
>>> 
>>> com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.checkApplication1(AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.java:90)
>>> 
>>> I note that this test has been observed to fail for other community
>>> members in earlier RCs.
>>> 
>> 
>> Yes, it's true, we've fixed it on 2.6.x branch, and will be in next
>> release, 2.6.4, but not in 2.6.3.
>> 
>> check the commit:
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/commit/93d2eb674b094ee4feee0ef1e46096098c5a22b4
>> 
>> 
>>> I can recreate this failure on the command line but not in an IDE.
>>> 
>>> Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
>>> something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.
>>> 
>> 
>> This is the result of mutual influence of unit test cases, not the
>> functional problem. So IMO, this release could be go ahead. What do other
>> people think?
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Mark
>>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Willem Jiang <wi...@gmail.com>.
I just checked the commit, it relates to system property setting, the
fix is quite simple.
I also checked the CI build, it looks like the CI is green[1]

But my question is this fix was merged into 2.6.x branch for three
weeks ago,  why didn't we do the cherry pick it into 2.6.3 release
branch last week?
In Apache projects we maintain 2~3 different branches at the same
time, cherry pick the fix acrocess different branches is a common
practice.
As someone already observered the test failure in earlier RC, we need
to put some efforts on it (issue tracking) to make sure we fix it in
the next RC.

I know Dubbo team takes almost 1 month to cut this round release,  but
it's like a pain of growing. ServiceComb took more than a month to cut
the first around release. We can do the release better if we learn
something from it.  Please revisit your release guide and checklist
again, and encourage community to vote -1 once he find something
wrong.

[1]https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-dubbo/builds/420912788

Willem Jiang

Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:39 PM Jerrick Zhu <je...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:10 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On 03/09/18 03:32, Jun Liu wrote:
> >
> > <snip/>
> >
> > > Please vote accordingly:
> > > [X] +1 approve
> > > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > > [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason
> >
> > Notes:
> > ======
> >
> > Hash and signature match.
> >
> > Source zip matches Git tag (apart from expected differences of
> > .gitignore and Maven wrapper)
> >
> > Builds and all tests except one pass.
> >
> >
> > Issues from previous RC still present in this RC:
> > =================================================
> >
> > The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
> > hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. New RC
> > not required.
> >
> >
> > New issues
> > ==========
> >
> > Tests seem to expect 127.0.0.2 to be a valid IP. If this is the case,
> > consider documenting the requirements to run the tests somewhere obvious
> > in the source tree. Trivial issue. New RC not required.
> >
> > I see the following test failures:
> >   Oracle Java 8 update 181
> >   Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS (fully patched)
> >   Maven 3.5.4
> >
> > This fails consistently for me:
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Tests run: 38, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.119
> > sec <<< FAILURE! - in com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> > checkApplication1(com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest)
> > Time elapsed: 0.006 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> > junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<10[0]> but was:<10[]>
> >         at
> >
> > com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.checkApplication1(AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.java:90)
> >
> > I note that this test has been observed to fail for other community
> > members in earlier RCs.
> >
>
> Yes, it's true, we've fixed it on 2.6.x branch, and will be in next
> release, 2.6.4, but not in 2.6.3.
>
> check the commit:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/commit/93d2eb674b094ee4feee0ef1e46096098c5a22b4
>
>
> > I can recreate this failure on the command line but not in an IDE.
> >
> > Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
> > something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.
> >
>
> This is the result of mutual influence of unit test cases, not the
> functional problem. So IMO, this release could be go ahead. What do other
> people think?
>
>
> >
> >
> > Mark
> >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Willem Jiang <wi...@gmail.com>.
I just checked the commit, it relates to system property setting, the
fix is quite simple.
I also checked the CI build, it looks like the CI is green[1]

But my question is this fix was merged into 2.6.x branch for three
weeks ago,  why didn't we do the cherry pick it into 2.6.3 release
branch last week?
In Apache projects we maintain 2~3 different branches at the same
time, cherry pick the fix acrocess different branches is a common
practice.
As someone already observered the test failure in earlier RC, we need
to put some efforts on it (issue tracking) to make sure we fix it in
the next RC.

I know Dubbo team takes almost 1 month to cut this round release,  but
it's like a pain of growing. ServiceComb took more than a month to cut
the first around release. We can do the release better if we learn
something from it.  Please revisit your release guide and checklist
again, and encourage community to vote -1 once he find something
wrong.

[1]https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-dubbo/builds/420912788

Willem Jiang

Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:39 PM Jerrick Zhu <je...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:10 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On 03/09/18 03:32, Jun Liu wrote:
> >
> > <snip/>
> >
> > > Please vote accordingly:
> > > [X] +1 approve
> > > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > > [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason
> >
> > Notes:
> > ======
> >
> > Hash and signature match.
> >
> > Source zip matches Git tag (apart from expected differences of
> > .gitignore and Maven wrapper)
> >
> > Builds and all tests except one pass.
> >
> >
> > Issues from previous RC still present in this RC:
> > =================================================
> >
> > The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
> > hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. New RC
> > not required.
> >
> >
> > New issues
> > ==========
> >
> > Tests seem to expect 127.0.0.2 to be a valid IP. If this is the case,
> > consider documenting the requirements to run the tests somewhere obvious
> > in the source tree. Trivial issue. New RC not required.
> >
> > I see the following test failures:
> >   Oracle Java 8 update 181
> >   Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS (fully patched)
> >   Maven 3.5.4
> >
> > This fails consistently for me:
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Tests run: 38, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.119
> > sec <<< FAILURE! - in com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> > checkApplication1(com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest)
> > Time elapsed: 0.006 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> > junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<10[0]> but was:<10[]>
> >         at
> >
> > com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.checkApplication1(AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.java:90)
> >
> > I note that this test has been observed to fail for other community
> > members in earlier RCs.
> >
>
> Yes, it's true, we've fixed it on 2.6.x branch, and will be in next
> release, 2.6.4, but not in 2.6.3.
>
> check the commit:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/commit/93d2eb674b094ee4feee0ef1e46096098c5a22b4
>
>
> > I can recreate this failure on the command line but not in an IDE.
> >
> > Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
> > something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.
> >
>
> This is the result of mutual influence of unit test cases, not the
> functional problem. So IMO, this release could be go ahead. What do other
> people think?
>
>
> >
> >
> > Mark
> >

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Ian Luo <ia...@gmail.com>.
Since this is a known issue, and the fix has already been made for the
future release. I am supportive to continue to release version 2.6.3.

-Ian.

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:45 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:

> On 05/09/18 11:39, Jerrick Zhu wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:10 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> <snip/>
>
> >> This fails consistently for me:
> >>
> >>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
>
> <snip/>
>
> >> Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
> >> something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.
> >>
> >
> > This is the result of mutual influence of unit test cases, not the
> > functional problem. So IMO, this release could be go ahead. What do other
> > people think?
>
> Generally, if the reason for a unit test failure is well understood and
> the root cause is a bug in the unit test then I would lean towards
> continuing the release.
>
> Mark
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>.
On 05/09/18 11:39, Jerrick Zhu wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:10 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:

<snip/>

>> This fails consistently for me:
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest

<snip/>

>> Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
>> something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.
>>
> 
> This is the result of mutual influence of unit test cases, not the
> functional problem. So IMO, this release could be go ahead. What do other
> people think?

Generally, if the reason for a unit test failure is well understood and
the root cause is a bug in the unit test then I would lean towards
continuing the release.

Mark

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Jerrick Zhu <je...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:10 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:

> On 03/09/18 03:32, Jun Liu wrote:
>
> <snip/>
>
> > Please vote accordingly:
> > [X] +1 approve
> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason
>
> Notes:
> ======
>
> Hash and signature match.
>
> Source zip matches Git tag (apart from expected differences of
> .gitignore and Maven wrapper)
>
> Builds and all tests except one pass.
>
>
> Issues from previous RC still present in this RC:
> =================================================
>
> The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
> hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. New RC
> not required.
>
>
> New issues
> ==========
>
> Tests seem to expect 127.0.0.2 to be a valid IP. If this is the case,
> consider documenting the requirements to run the tests somewhere obvious
> in the source tree. Trivial issue. New RC not required.
>
> I see the following test failures:
>   Oracle Java 8 update 181
>   Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS (fully patched)
>   Maven 3.5.4
>
> This fails consistently for me:
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tests run: 38, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.119
> sec <<< FAILURE! - in com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> checkApplication1(com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest)
> Time elapsed: 0.006 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<10[0]> but was:<10[]>
>         at
>
> com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.checkApplication1(AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.java:90)
>
> I note that this test has been observed to fail for other community
> members in earlier RCs.
>

Yes, it's true, we've fixed it on 2.6.x branch, and will be in next
release, 2.6.4, but not in 2.6.3.

check the commit:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/commit/93d2eb674b094ee4feee0ef1e46096098c5a22b4


> I can recreate this failure on the command line but not in an IDE.
>
> Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
> something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.
>

This is the result of mutual influence of unit test cases, not the
functional problem. So IMO, this release could be go ahead. What do other
people think?


>
>
> Mark
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Jerrick Zhu <je...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:10 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:

> On 03/09/18 03:32, Jun Liu wrote:
>
> <snip/>
>
> > Please vote accordingly:
> > [X] +1 approve
> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason
>
> Notes:
> ======
>
> Hash and signature match.
>
> Source zip matches Git tag (apart from expected differences of
> .gitignore and Maven wrapper)
>
> Builds and all tests except one pass.
>
>
> Issues from previous RC still present in this RC:
> =================================================
>
> The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
> hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. New RC
> not required.
>
>
> New issues
> ==========
>
> Tests seem to expect 127.0.0.2 to be a valid IP. If this is the case,
> consider documenting the requirements to run the tests somewhere obvious
> in the source tree. Trivial issue. New RC not required.
>
> I see the following test failures:
>   Oracle Java 8 update 181
>   Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS (fully patched)
>   Maven 3.5.4
>
> This fails consistently for me:
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tests run: 38, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.119
> sec <<< FAILURE! - in com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> checkApplication1(com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest)
> Time elapsed: 0.006 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<10[0]> but was:<10[]>
>         at
>
> com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.checkApplication1(AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.java:90)
>
> I note that this test has been observed to fail for other community
> members in earlier RCs.
>

Yes, it's true, we've fixed it on 2.6.x branch, and will be in next
release, 2.6.4, but not in 2.6.3.

check the commit:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/commit/93d2eb674b094ee4feee0ef1e46096098c5a22b4


> I can recreate this failure on the command line but not in an IDE.
>
> Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
> something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.
>

This is the result of mutual influence of unit test cases, not the
functional problem. So IMO, this release could be go ahead. What do other
people think?


>
>
> Mark
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by jun liu <ke...@gmail.com>.
> Issues from previous RC still present in this RC:
> =================================================
> 
> The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
> hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. New RC
> not required.

I have filed an issue[1] to track this problem though I have no idea how to address it now. I will com to the dev community later if I cannot solve it after looking up.

> New issues
> ==========
> 
> Tests seem to expect 127.0.0.2 to be a valid IP. If this is the case,
> consider documenting the requirements to run the tests somewhere obvious
> in the source tree. Trivial issue. New RC not required.


Agree, it should be documented in the source tree[2].

> I see the following test failures:
>  Oracle Java 8 update 181
>  Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS (fully patched)
>  Maven 3.5.4
> 
> This fails consistently for me:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tests run: 38, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.119
> sec <<< FAILURE! - in com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> checkApplication1(com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest)
> Time elapsed: 0.006 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<10[0]> but was:<10[]>
> 	at
> com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.checkApplication1(AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.java:90)
> 
> I note that this test has been observed to fail for other community
> members in earlier RCs.
> 
> I can recreate this failure on the command line but not in an IDE.
> 
> Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
> something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.

Sorry for confusing you and others with this issue[3], I have confirmed that it’s a bug of the UT itself, and I think we can fix it in the next release and continue with this release.

[1]. https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/issues/2459
[2]. https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/issues/2460
[3]. https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/issues/2461

Best regards,
Jun

> On 5 Sep 2018, at 18:09, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> On 03/09/18 03:32, Jun Liu wrote:
> 
> <snip/>
> 
>> Please vote accordingly:
>> [X] +1 approve 
>> [ ] +0 no opinion 
>> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason
> 
> Notes:
> ======
> 
> Hash and signature match.
> 
> Source zip matches Git tag (apart from expected differences of
> .gitignore and Maven wrapper)
> 
> Builds and all tests except one pass.
> 
> 
> Issues from previous RC still present in this RC:
> =================================================
> 
> The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
> hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. New RC
> not required.
> 
> 
> New issues
> ==========
> 
> Tests seem to expect 127.0.0.2 to be a valid IP. If this is the case,
> consider documenting the requirements to run the tests somewhere obvious
> in the source tree. Trivial issue. New RC not required.
> 
> I see the following test failures:
>  Oracle Java 8 update 181
>  Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS (fully patched)
>  Maven 3.5.4
> 
> This fails consistently for me:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tests run: 38, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.119
> sec <<< FAILURE! - in com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> checkApplication1(com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest)
> Time elapsed: 0.006 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<10[0]> but was:<10[]>
> 	at
> com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.checkApplication1(AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.java:90)
> 
> I note that this test has been observed to fail for other community
> members in earlier RCs.
> 
> I can recreate this failure on the command line but not in an IDE.
> 
> Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
> something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.
> 
> 
> Mark


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by jun liu <ke...@gmail.com>.
> Issues from previous RC still present in this RC:
> =================================================
> 
> The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
> hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. New RC
> not required.

I have filed an issue[1] to track this problem though I have no idea how to address it now. I will com to the dev community later if I cannot solve it after looking up.

> New issues
> ==========
> 
> Tests seem to expect 127.0.0.2 to be a valid IP. If this is the case,
> consider documenting the requirements to run the tests somewhere obvious
> in the source tree. Trivial issue. New RC not required.


Agree, it should be documented in the source tree[2].

> I see the following test failures:
>  Oracle Java 8 update 181
>  Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS (fully patched)
>  Maven 3.5.4
> 
> This fails consistently for me:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tests run: 38, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.119
> sec <<< FAILURE! - in com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> checkApplication1(com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest)
> Time elapsed: 0.006 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<10[0]> but was:<10[]>
> 	at
> com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.checkApplication1(AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.java:90)
> 
> I note that this test has been observed to fail for other community
> members in earlier RCs.
> 
> I can recreate this failure on the command line but not in an IDE.
> 
> Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
> something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.

Sorry for confusing you and others with this issue[3], I have confirmed that it’s a bug of the UT itself, and I think we can fix it in the next release and continue with this release.

[1]. https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/issues/2459
[2]. https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/issues/2460
[3]. https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/issues/2461

Best regards,
Jun

> On 5 Sep 2018, at 18:09, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> On 03/09/18 03:32, Jun Liu wrote:
> 
> <snip/>
> 
>> Please vote accordingly:
>> [X] +1 approve 
>> [ ] +0 no opinion 
>> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason
> 
> Notes:
> ======
> 
> Hash and signature match.
> 
> Source zip matches Git tag (apart from expected differences of
> .gitignore and Maven wrapper)
> 
> Builds and all tests except one pass.
> 
> 
> Issues from previous RC still present in this RC:
> =================================================
> 
> The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
> hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. New RC
> not required.
> 
> 
> New issues
> ==========
> 
> Tests seem to expect 127.0.0.2 to be a valid IP. If this is the case,
> consider documenting the requirements to run the tests somewhere obvious
> in the source tree. Trivial issue. New RC not required.
> 
> I see the following test failures:
>  Oracle Java 8 update 181
>  Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS (fully patched)
>  Maven 3.5.4
> 
> This fails consistently for me:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tests run: 38, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.119
> sec <<< FAILURE! - in com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
> checkApplication1(com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest)
> Time elapsed: 0.006 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<10[0]> but was:<10[]>
> 	at
> com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.checkApplication1(AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.java:90)
> 
> I note that this test has been observed to fail for other community
> members in earlier RCs.
> 
> I can recreate this failure on the command line but not in an IDE.
> 
> Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
> something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.
> 
> 
> Mark

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>.
On 03/09/18 03:32, Jun Liu wrote:

<snip/>

> Please vote accordingly:
> [X] +1 approve 
> [ ] +0 no opinion 
> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason

Notes:
======

Hash and signature match.

Source zip matches Git tag (apart from expected differences of
.gitignore and Maven wrapper)

Builds and all tests except one pass.


Issues from previous RC still present in this RC:
=================================================

The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. New RC
not required.


New issues
==========

Tests seem to expect 127.0.0.2 to be a valid IP. If this is the case,
consider documenting the requirements to run the tests somewhere obvious
in the source tree. Trivial issue. New RC not required.

I see the following test failures:
  Oracle Java 8 update 181
  Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS (fully patched)
  Maven 3.5.4

This fails consistently for me:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tests run: 38, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.119
sec <<< FAILURE! - in com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
checkApplication1(com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest)
Time elapsed: 0.006 sec  <<< FAILURE!
junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<10[0]> but was:<10[]>
	at
com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.checkApplication1(AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.java:90)

I note that this test has been observed to fail for other community
members in earlier RCs.

I can recreate this failure on the command line but not in an IDE.

Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.


Mark

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo (Incubating) 2.6.3 [RC5]

Posted by Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>.
On 03/09/18 03:32, Jun Liu wrote:

<snip/>

> Please vote accordingly:
> [X] +1 approve 
> [ ] +0 no opinion 
> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason

Notes:
======

Hash and signature match.

Source zip matches Git tag (apart from expected differences of
.gitignore and Maven wrapper)

Builds and all tests except one pass.


Issues from previous RC still present in this RC:
=================================================

The sha512 hashes are missing the '*' marker that indicates they are
hashes for binary files rather than text files. Trivial issue. New RC
not required.


New issues
==========

Tests seem to expect 127.0.0.2 to be a valid IP. If this is the case,
consider documenting the requirements to run the tests somewhere obvious
in the source tree. Trivial issue. New RC not required.

I see the following test failures:
  Oracle Java 8 update 181
  Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS (fully patched)
  Maven 3.5.4

This fails consistently for me:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test set: com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tests run: 38, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.119
sec <<< FAILURE! - in com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest
checkApplication1(com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest)
Time elapsed: 0.006 sec  <<< FAILURE!
junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<10[0]> but was:<10[]>
	at
com.alibaba.dubbo.config.AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.checkApplication1(AbstractInterfaceConfigTest.java:90)

I note that this test has been observed to fail for other community
members in earlier RCs.

I can recreate this failure on the command line but not in an IDE.

Whether this failure is significant enough to halt the release is
something for those more knowledgeable about Dubbo than I to decide.


Mark

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org