You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@oozie.apache.org by Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> on 2012/02/14 01:43:26 UTC

[VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Hi,

Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.

I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most of the comments (including Chris's finding). 
The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:

OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1 (tucu)
OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information. (Mohammad)
OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all pom.xml.(Mohammad)
OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory for docs. (rvs via tucu)
OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are failing(Mohamed).
OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie src(Mohammad)

Keys used to sign the release are available at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.

Please download, test, and try it out from here:

http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/

The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be found at the above link.
In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created could be found at :
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/

Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.

Regards,
Mohammad

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@apache.org>.

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/

+1 (non-binding).

Pulled this RC into Bigtop and produced a stack on top of Hadoop 1.0.
Basic tests on a fully distributed deployment ran.

NOTE: for folks wanting to experiment with this RC some more,
here's a link where you can get packages for your favorite linux
distro (DISTRO=centos5|centos6|fedora15|fedora16|sles11|lucid):
   http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-RCs/job/Bigtop-RCs-Repository/label=DISTRO/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/repo/
e.g.:
   http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-RCs/job/Bigtop-RCs-Repository/label=centos5/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/repo/

And if you want miminum hassle (or you happen to be stranded on Windows):
   http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-RCs/job/Bigtop-RCs-VM-matrix/

Thanks,
Roman.

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>.

+1 -C

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>
> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>
> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1 (tucu)
> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information. (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are failing(Mohamed).
> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie src(Mohammad)
>
> Keys used to sign the release are available at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>
> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>
> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be found at the above link.
> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created could be found at :
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>
> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>
> Regards,
> Mohammad

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>.

Looks good to me.

Verified source GPG signature, contents of the rat report, built from
source and tested Oozie server starts.

Thanks Mohammad for doing all the heavy lifting with our first Apache Oozie
release.

Alejandro

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>
> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most
> of the comments (including Chris's finding).
> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>
> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate hadoop
> versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
> (tucu)
> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
> (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
> failing(Mohamed).
> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie
> src(Mohammad)
>
> Keys used to sign the release are available at
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>
> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>
> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be
> found at the above link.
> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
> could be found at :
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>
> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>
> Regards,
> Mohammad
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@apache.org>.

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/

+1 (non-binding).

Pulled this RC into Bigtop and produced a stack on top of Hadoop 1.0.
Basic tests on a fully distributed deployment ran.

NOTE: for folks wanting to experiment with this RC some more,
here's a link where you can get packages for your favorite linux
distro (DISTRO=centos5|centos6|fedora15|fedora16|sles11|lucid):
   http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-RCs/job/Bigtop-RCs-Repository/label=DISTRO/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/repo/
e.g.:
   http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-RCs/job/Bigtop-RCs-Repository/label=centos5/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/repo/

And if you want miminum hassle (or you happen to be stranded on Windows):
   http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-RCs/job/Bigtop-RCs-VM-matrix/

Thanks,
Roman.

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>.

Great. Thanks to you Mohammad for driving our first Apache release out of
the door.

Alejandro

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>
> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
> better.
> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
> process smoother.
> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>
> Regards,
> Moahmmad
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>
> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>
> +1 for the release.
>
> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> >
> > I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most
> of the comments (including Chris's finding).
> > The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> >
> > OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> > OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
> > OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
> (tucu)
> > OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> > OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
> (Mohammad)
> > OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> > OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> > OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> > OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> > OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
> failing(Mohamed).
> > OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie
> src(Mohammad)
> >
> > Keys used to sign the release are available at
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> >
> > Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> >
> > http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> >
> > The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be
> found at the above link.
> > In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
> could be found at :
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> >
> > Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mohammad
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>.

Great. Thanks to you Mohammad for driving our first Apache release out of
the door.

Alejandro

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>
> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
> better.
> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
> process smoother.
> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>
> Regards,
> Moahmmad
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>
> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>
> +1 for the release.
>
> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> >
> > I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most
> of the comments (including Chris's finding).
> > The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> >
> > OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> > OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
> > OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
> (tucu)
> > OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> > OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
> (Mohammad)
> > OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> > OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> > OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> > OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> > OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
> failing(Mohamed).
> > OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie
> src(Mohammad)
> >
> > Keys used to sign the release are available at
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> >
> > Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> >
> > http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> >
> > The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be
> found at the above link.
> > In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
> could be found at :
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> >
> > Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mohammad
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by "Angelo K. Huang" <an...@apache.org>.

+1
I ran tests and passed in first try without issues. Great Jobs!

Thanks,
Angelo

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Mona Chitnis <ch...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:

>  For me too, org.apache.oozie.service.TestPauseTransitService passed on 1
> retry.
>
> +1 on the release. Great job!
>
> Mona
>
>
>
> On 2/17/12 2:50 PM, "Harsh J" <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> +1 on rc2 (ccb3e271892d6e69881eb3785ef2bc3c).
>
> (On OSX) - Downloaded, ran bin/mkdistro.sh and it ended in a success
> after one retry.
>
> (Test org.apache.oozie.service.TestPauseTransitService seems a little
> flaky, but may be just me, cause eventual runs of that specific test
> all passed - it just failed on my first run).
>
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Virag Kothari <vi...@yahoo-inc.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Downloaded the source, ran the test cases - all works fine!
> > +1
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Virag
> >
> > On 2/17/12 3:38 AM, "Chris Douglas" <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >>> Hi Chris,
> >>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
> >>
> >> Yes
> >>
> >>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at
> this
> >>> stage?
> >>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
> >>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
> >>
> >> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
> >> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
> >> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
> >>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Mohammad
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ________________________________
> >>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
> >>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org"
> >>> <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> >>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
> >>>
> >>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
> >>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
> >>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
> >>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
> >>> series, just as a PMC does.
> >>>
> >>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
> >>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
> >>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
> >>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
> >>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
> >>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
> >>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
> >>>
> >>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
> >>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
> >>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
> >>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
> >>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
> >>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
> >>> the ASF into legal trouble.
> >>>
> >>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
> >>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
> >>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
> >>> problem. -C
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tucu@cloudera.com
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> Chris,
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes
> where from
> >>>> the IPMC.
> >>>>
> >>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
> lines.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thxs.
> >>>>
> >>>> Alejandro
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I
> know,
> >>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
> >>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
> >>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
> >>>>> please weigh in? -C
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi All,
> >>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
> >>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make
> it
> >>>>> better.
> >>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
> whole
> >>>>> process smoother.
> >>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>> Moahmmad
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ________________________________
> >>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
> >>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
> good.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> +1 for the release.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
> >>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
> >>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
> >>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
> >>>>> (tucu)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
> 1.0.0/0.23.1
> >>>>> (tucu)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
> >>>>> (Mohammad)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
> >>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
> subdirectory
> >>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
> >>>>> failing(Mohamed).
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
> >>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
> >>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
> can
> >>>>> be found at the above link.
> >>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
> created
> >>>>> could be found at :
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>> Mohammad
> >>>>>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *mona
> **chitnis
> *software developer
>
> chitnis@yahoo-inc.com
> direct 408-336-7908    mobile 864-650-0100
>
> 701 first avenue, sunnyvale, ca, 94089-0703, us
> phone (408) 349 3300    fax (408) 349 3301
>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by "Angelo K. Huang" <an...@apache.org>.

+1
I ran tests and passed in first try without issues. Great Jobs!

Thanks,
Angelo

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Mona Chitnis <ch...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:

>  For me too, org.apache.oozie.service.TestPauseTransitService passed on 1
> retry.
>
> +1 on the release. Great job!
>
> Mona
>
>
>
> On 2/17/12 2:50 PM, "Harsh J" <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> +1 on rc2 (ccb3e271892d6e69881eb3785ef2bc3c).
>
> (On OSX) - Downloaded, ran bin/mkdistro.sh and it ended in a success
> after one retry.
>
> (Test org.apache.oozie.service.TestPauseTransitService seems a little
> flaky, but may be just me, cause eventual runs of that specific test
> all passed - it just failed on my first run).
>
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Virag Kothari <vi...@yahoo-inc.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Downloaded the source, ran the test cases - all works fine!
> > +1
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Virag
> >
> > On 2/17/12 3:38 AM, "Chris Douglas" <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >>> Hi Chris,
> >>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
> >>
> >> Yes
> >>
> >>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at
> this
> >>> stage?
> >>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
> >>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
> >>
> >> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
> >> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
> >> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
> >>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Mohammad
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ________________________________
> >>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
> >>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org"
> >>> <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> >>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
> >>>
> >>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
> >>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
> >>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
> >>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
> >>> series, just as a PMC does.
> >>>
> >>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
> >>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
> >>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
> >>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
> >>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
> >>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
> >>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
> >>>
> >>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
> >>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
> >>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
> >>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
> >>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
> >>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
> >>> the ASF into legal trouble.
> >>>
> >>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
> >>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
> >>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
> >>> problem. -C
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tucu@cloudera.com
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> Chris,
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes
> where from
> >>>> the IPMC.
> >>>>
> >>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
> lines.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thxs.
> >>>>
> >>>> Alejandro
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I
> know,
> >>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
> >>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
> >>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
> >>>>> please weigh in? -C
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi All,
> >>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
> >>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make
> it
> >>>>> better.
> >>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
> whole
> >>>>> process smoother.
> >>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>> Moahmmad
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ________________________________
> >>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
> >>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
> good.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> +1 for the release.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
> >>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
> >>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
> >>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
> >>>>> (tucu)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
> 1.0.0/0.23.1
> >>>>> (tucu)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
> >>>>> (Mohammad)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
> >>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
> subdirectory
> >>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
> >>>>> failing(Mohamed).
> >>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
> >>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
> >>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
> can
> >>>>> be found at the above link.
> >>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
> created
> >>>>> could be found at :
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>> Mohammad
> >>>>>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *mona
> **chitnis
> *software developer
>
> chitnis@yahoo-inc.com
> direct 408-336-7908    mobile 864-650-0100
>
> 701 first avenue, sunnyvale, ca, 94089-0703, us
> phone (408) 349 3300    fax (408) 349 3301
>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mona Chitnis <ch...@yahoo-inc.com>.

For me too, org.apache.oozie.service.TestPauseTransitService passed on 1 retry.

+1 on the release. Great job!

Mona


On 2/17/12 2:50 PM, "Harsh J" <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote:

+1 on rc2 (ccb3e271892d6e69881eb3785ef2bc3c).

(On OSX) - Downloaded, ran bin/mkdistro.sh and it ended in a success
after one retry.

(Test org.apache.oozie.service.TestPauseTransitService seems a little
flaky, but may be just me, cause eventual runs of that specific test
all passed - it just failed on my first run).

On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Virag Kothari <vi...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Downloaded the source, ran the test cases - all works fine!
> +1
>
> Thanks,
> Virag
>
> On 2/17/12 3:38 AM, "Chris Douglas" <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Chris,
>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>>
>> Yes
>>
>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at this
>>> stage?
>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>>
>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Mohammad
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "oozie-users@incubator.apache.org"
>>> <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>
>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>>
>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>>
>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>>
>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>> problem. -C
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Chris,
>>>>
>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where from
>>>> the IPMC.
>>>>
>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same lines.
>>>>
>>>> Thxs.
>>>>
>>>> Alejandro
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>>
>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>>> better.
>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can
>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>>
>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>>
>



--
mona
chitnis
software developer

chitnis@yahoo-inc.com
direct 408-336-7908    mobile 864-650-0100

701 first avenue, sunnyvale, ca, 94089-0703, us
phone (408) 349 3300    fax (408) 349 3301

[cid:3412336786_2051424]

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mona Chitnis <ch...@yahoo-inc.com>.

For me too, org.apache.oozie.service.TestPauseTransitService passed on 1 retry.

+1 on the release. Great job!

Mona


On 2/17/12 2:50 PM, "Harsh J" <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote:

+1 on rc2 (ccb3e271892d6e69881eb3785ef2bc3c).

(On OSX) - Downloaded, ran bin/mkdistro.sh and it ended in a success
after one retry.

(Test org.apache.oozie.service.TestPauseTransitService seems a little
flaky, but may be just me, cause eventual runs of that specific test
all passed - it just failed on my first run).

On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Virag Kothari <vi...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Downloaded the source, ran the test cases - all works fine!
> +1
>
> Thanks,
> Virag
>
> On 2/17/12 3:38 AM, "Chris Douglas" <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Chris,
>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>>
>> Yes
>>
>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at this
>>> stage?
>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>>
>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Mohammad
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "oozie-users@incubator.apache.org"
>>> <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>
>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>>
>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>>
>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>>
>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>> problem. -C
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Chris,
>>>>
>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where from
>>>> the IPMC.
>>>>
>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same lines.
>>>>
>>>> Thxs.
>>>>
>>>> Alejandro
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>>
>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>>> better.
>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can
>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>>
>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>>
>



--
mona
chitnis
software developer

chitnis@yahoo-inc.com
direct 408-336-7908    mobile 864-650-0100

701 first avenue, sunnyvale, ca, 94089-0703, us
phone (408) 349 3300    fax (408) 349 3301

[cid:3412336786_2051424]

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Harsh J <ha...@cloudera.com>.

+1 on rc2 (ccb3e271892d6e69881eb3785ef2bc3c).

(On OSX) - Downloaded, ran bin/mkdistro.sh and it ended in a success
after one retry.

(Test org.apache.oozie.service.TestPauseTransitService seems a little
flaky, but may be just me, cause eventual runs of that specific test
all passed - it just failed on my first run).

On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Virag Kothari <vi...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Downloaded the source, ran the test cases - all works fine!
> +1
>
> Thanks,
> Virag
>
> On 2/17/12 3:38 AM, "Chris Douglas" <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Chris,
>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>>
>> Yes
>>
>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at this
>>> stage?
>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>>
>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Mohammad
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "oozie-users@incubator.apache.org"
>>> <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>
>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>>
>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>>
>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>>
>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>> problem. -C
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Chris,
>>>>
>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where from
>>>> the IPMC.
>>>>
>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same lines.
>>>>
>>>> Thxs.
>>>>
>>>> Alejandro
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>>
>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>>> better.
>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can
>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>>
>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>>
>



-- 
Harsh J
Customer Ops. Engineer
Cloudera | http://tiny.cloudera.com/about

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Harsh J <ha...@cloudera.com>.

+1 on rc2 (ccb3e271892d6e69881eb3785ef2bc3c).

(On OSX) - Downloaded, ran bin/mkdistro.sh and it ended in a success
after one retry.

(Test org.apache.oozie.service.TestPauseTransitService seems a little
flaky, but may be just me, cause eventual runs of that specific test
all passed - it just failed on my first run).

On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Virag Kothari <vi...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Downloaded the source, ran the test cases - all works fine!
> +1
>
> Thanks,
> Virag
>
> On 2/17/12 3:38 AM, "Chris Douglas" <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Chris,
>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>>
>> Yes
>>
>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at this
>>> stage?
>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>>
>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Mohammad
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "oozie-users@incubator.apache.org"
>>> <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>
>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>>
>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>>
>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>>
>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>> problem. -C
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Chris,
>>>>
>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where from
>>>> the IPMC.
>>>>
>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same lines.
>>>>
>>>> Thxs.
>>>>
>>>> Alejandro
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>>
>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>>> better.
>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can
>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>>
>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>>
>



-- 
Harsh J
Customer Ops. Engineer
Cloudera | http://tiny.cloudera.com/about

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

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mohamed Battisha <mb...@live.com>.

+1
Downloaded the source and ran the unit tests

Things look fine 

Thanks!
Mohamed

On Feb 17, 2012, at 11:59 AM, Mayank Bansal wrote:

> +1
> 
> looks good.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mayank
> 
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Chris,
>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>> 
>> Yes
>> 
>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at
>> this stage?
>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>> 
>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Mohammad
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
>> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>> 
>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>> 
>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>> 
>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>> 
>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>> problem. -C
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> Chris,
>>>> 
>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where
>> from
>>>> the IPMC.
>>>> 
>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
>> lines.
>>>> 
>>>> Thxs.
>>>> 
>>>> Alejandro
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>>> better.
>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
>> whole
>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
>> good.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
>> 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
>> subdirectory
>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
>> can
>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
>> created
>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>> 
>> 


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

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Thiruvel Thirumoolan <th...@yahoo-inc.com>.

+1 (non-binding from a user).

Downloaded sources and ran bin/mkdistro.sh 2 times. All tests went through
fine no my RHEL 5.x
Deployed the distro using oozie-setup.sh on a single node un-secure Hadoop
20.205 cluster and launched a co-ordinator with about 20+ workflows. All
workflows completed as expected.

Thanks for all the hard work,

-Thiruvel

On 2/20/12 3:19 AM, "Mohamed Battisha" <mb...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>+1
>Downloaded the source and ran the unit test
>
>Everything looks fine
>
>Thanks!
>Mohamed
>
>On Feb 18, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Jeremy Hanna wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding from a user/contributor) - pulled down the artifacts
>>and did the maven tests on them.  Got it to complete, but on one of the
>>test runs I got test failures for TestPauseTransitService and
>>TestSshActionExecutor.  I think those may need to just be looked at for
>>completion consistency and not anything to do with the code their
>>testing.
>> 
>> On Feb 17, 2012, at 1:59 PM, Mayank Bansal wrote:
>> 
>>> +1
>>> 
>>> looks good.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mayank
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>>wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>>>> 
>>>> Yes
>>>> 
>>>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option
>>>>>at
>>>> this stage?
>>>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>>>> 
>>>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>>>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>>>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
>>>> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>> 
>>>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in
>>>>>some
>>>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>>>> problem. -C
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur
>>>>><tu...@cloudera.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Chris,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes
>>>>>>where
>>>> from
>>>>>> the IPMC.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
>>>> lines.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thxs.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Alejandro
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I
>>>>>>>know,
>>>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less
>>>>>>>significant
>>>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the
>>>>>>>PPMC
>>>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam
>>>>>>><mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or
>>>>>>>>0.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to
>>>>>>>>make it
>>>>>>> better.
>>>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
>>>> whole
>>>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
>>>> good.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3
>>>>>>>>>incorporating
>>>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with
>>>>>>>>>appropriate
>>>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop
>>>>>>>>>version
>>>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
>>>> 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group
>>>>>>>>>(tucu)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
>>>> subdirectory
>>>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries
>>>>>>>>>into
>>>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
>>>> can
>>>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
>>>> created
>>>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2
>>>>/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>


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

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Thiruvel Thirumoolan <th...@yahoo-inc.com>.

+1 (non-binding from a user).

Downloaded sources and ran bin/mkdistro.sh 2 times. All tests went through
fine no my RHEL 5.x
Deployed the distro using oozie-setup.sh on a single node un-secure Hadoop
20.205 cluster and launched a co-ordinator with about 20+ workflows. All
workflows completed as expected.

Thanks for all the hard work,

-Thiruvel

On 2/20/12 3:19 AM, "Mohamed Battisha" <mb...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>+1
>Downloaded the source and ran the unit test
>
>Everything looks fine
>
>Thanks!
>Mohamed
>
>On Feb 18, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Jeremy Hanna wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding from a user/contributor) - pulled down the artifacts
>>and did the maven tests on them.  Got it to complete, but on one of the
>>test runs I got test failures for TestPauseTransitService and
>>TestSshActionExecutor.  I think those may need to just be looked at for
>>completion consistency and not anything to do with the code their
>>testing.
>> 
>> On Feb 17, 2012, at 1:59 PM, Mayank Bansal wrote:
>> 
>>> +1
>>> 
>>> looks good.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mayank
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>>wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>>>> 
>>>> Yes
>>>> 
>>>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option
>>>>>at
>>>> this stage?
>>>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>>>> 
>>>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>>>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>>>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
>>>> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>> 
>>>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in
>>>>>some
>>>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>>>> problem. -C
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur
>>>>><tu...@cloudera.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Chris,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes
>>>>>>where
>>>> from
>>>>>> the IPMC.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
>>>> lines.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thxs.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Alejandro
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I
>>>>>>>know,
>>>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less
>>>>>>>significant
>>>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the
>>>>>>>PPMC
>>>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam
>>>>>>><mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or
>>>>>>>>0.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to
>>>>>>>>make it
>>>>>>> better.
>>>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
>>>> whole
>>>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
>>>> good.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3
>>>>>>>>>incorporating
>>>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with
>>>>>>>>>appropriate
>>>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop
>>>>>>>>>version
>>>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
>>>> 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group
>>>>>>>>>(tucu)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
>>>> subdirectory
>>>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries
>>>>>>>>>into
>>>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
>>>> can
>>>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
>>>> created
>>>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2
>>>>/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Thiruvel Thirumoolan <th...@yahoo-inc.com>.

+1 (non-binding from a user).

Downloaded sources and ran bin/mkdistro.sh 2 times. All tests went through
fine no my RHEL 5.x
Deployed the distro using oozie-setup.sh on a single node un-secure Hadoop
20.205 cluster and launched a co-ordinator with about 20+ workflows. All
workflows completed as expected.

Thanks for all the hard work,

-Thiruvel

On 2/20/12 3:19 AM, "Mohamed Battisha" <mb...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>+1
>Downloaded the source and ran the unit test
>
>Everything looks fine
>
>Thanks!
>Mohamed
>
>On Feb 18, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Jeremy Hanna wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding from a user/contributor) - pulled down the artifacts
>>and did the maven tests on them.  Got it to complete, but on one of the
>>test runs I got test failures for TestPauseTransitService and
>>TestSshActionExecutor.  I think those may need to just be looked at for
>>completion consistency and not anything to do with the code their
>>testing.
>> 
>> On Feb 17, 2012, at 1:59 PM, Mayank Bansal wrote:
>> 
>>> +1
>>> 
>>> looks good.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mayank
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>>wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>>>> 
>>>> Yes
>>>> 
>>>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option
>>>>>at
>>>> this stage?
>>>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>>>> 
>>>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>>>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>>>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
>>>> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>> 
>>>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in
>>>>>some
>>>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>>>> problem. -C
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur
>>>>><tu...@cloudera.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Chris,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes
>>>>>>where
>>>> from
>>>>>> the IPMC.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
>>>> lines.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thxs.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Alejandro
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I
>>>>>>>know,
>>>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less
>>>>>>>significant
>>>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the
>>>>>>>PPMC
>>>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam
>>>>>>><mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or
>>>>>>>>0.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to
>>>>>>>>make it
>>>>>>> better.
>>>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
>>>> whole
>>>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
>>>> good.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3
>>>>>>>>>incorporating
>>>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with
>>>>>>>>>appropriate
>>>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop
>>>>>>>>>version
>>>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
>>>> 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group
>>>>>>>>>(tucu)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
>>>> subdirectory
>>>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries
>>>>>>>>>into
>>>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
>>>> can
>>>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
>>>> created
>>>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2
>>>>/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mohamed Battisha <mb...@yahoo.com>.

+1
Downloaded the source and ran the unit test 

Everything looks fine 

Thanks!
Mohamed

On Feb 18, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Jeremy Hanna wrote:

> +1 (non-binding from a user/contributor) - pulled down the artifacts and did the maven tests on them.  Got it to complete, but on one of the test runs I got test failures for TestPauseTransitService and TestSshActionExecutor.  I think those may need to just be looked at for completion consistency and not anything to do with the code their testing.
> 
> On Feb 17, 2012, at 1:59 PM, Mayank Bansal wrote:
> 
>> +1
>> 
>> looks good.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Mayank
>> 
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>>> 
>>> Yes
>>> 
>>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at
>>> this stage?
>>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>>> 
>>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Mohammad
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
>>> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>> 
>>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>>> 
>>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>>> 
>>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>>> 
>>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>>> problem. -C
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> Chris,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where
>>> from
>>>>> the IPMC.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
>>> lines.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thxs.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Alejandro
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>>>> better.
>>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
>>> whole
>>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
>>> good.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
>>> 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
>>> subdirectory
>>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
>>> can
>>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
>>> created
>>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>>> 
>>> 
> 


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

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mohamed Battisha <mb...@yahoo.com>.

+1
Downloaded the source and ran the unit test 

Everything looks fine 

Thanks!
Mohamed

On Feb 18, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Jeremy Hanna wrote:

> +1 (non-binding from a user/contributor) - pulled down the artifacts and did the maven tests on them.  Got it to complete, but on one of the test runs I got test failures for TestPauseTransitService and TestSshActionExecutor.  I think those may need to just be looked at for completion consistency and not anything to do with the code their testing.
> 
> On Feb 17, 2012, at 1:59 PM, Mayank Bansal wrote:
> 
>> +1
>> 
>> looks good.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Mayank
>> 
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>>> 
>>> Yes
>>> 
>>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at
>>> this stage?
>>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>>> 
>>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Mohammad
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
>>> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>> 
>>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>>> 
>>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>>> 
>>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>>> 
>>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>>> problem. -C
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> Chris,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where
>>> from
>>>>> the IPMC.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
>>> lines.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thxs.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Alejandro
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>>>> better.
>>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
>>> whole
>>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
>>> good.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
>>> 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
>>> subdirectory
>>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
>>> can
>>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
>>> created
>>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>>> 
>>> 
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mohamed Battisha <mb...@yahoo.com>.

+1
Downloaded the source and ran the unit test 

Everything looks fine 

Thanks!
Mohamed

On Feb 18, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Jeremy Hanna wrote:

> +1 (non-binding from a user/contributor) - pulled down the artifacts and did the maven tests on them.  Got it to complete, but on one of the test runs I got test failures for TestPauseTransitService and TestSshActionExecutor.  I think those may need to just be looked at for completion consistency and not anything to do with the code their testing.
> 
> On Feb 17, 2012, at 1:59 PM, Mayank Bansal wrote:
> 
>> +1
>> 
>> looks good.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Mayank
>> 
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>>> 
>>> Yes
>>> 
>>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at
>>> this stage?
>>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>>> 
>>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Mohammad
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
>>> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>> 
>>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>>> 
>>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>>> 
>>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>>> 
>>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>>> problem. -C
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> Chris,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where
>>> from
>>>>> the IPMC.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
>>> lines.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thxs.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Alejandro
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>>>> better.
>>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
>>> whole
>>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
>>> good.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
>>> 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
>>> subdirectory
>>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
>>> can
>>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
>>> created
>>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>>> 
>>> 
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Jeremy Hanna <je...@gmail.com>.

+1 (non-binding from a user/contributor) - pulled down the artifacts and did the maven tests on them.  Got it to complete, but on one of the test runs I got test failures for TestPauseTransitService and TestSshActionExecutor.  I think those may need to just be looked at for completion consistency and not anything to do with the code their testing.

On Feb 17, 2012, at 1:59 PM, Mayank Bansal wrote:

> +1
> 
> looks good.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mayank
> 
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Chris,
>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>> 
>> Yes
>> 
>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at
>> this stage?
>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>> 
>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Mohammad
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
>> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>> 
>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>> 
>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>> 
>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>> 
>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>> problem. -C
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> Chris,
>>>> 
>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where
>> from
>>>> the IPMC.
>>>> 
>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
>> lines.
>>>> 
>>>> Thxs.
>>>> 
>>>> Alejandro
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>>> better.
>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
>> whole
>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
>> good.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
>> 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
>> subdirectory
>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
>> can
>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
>> created
>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>> 
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Jeremy Hanna <je...@gmail.com>.

+1 (non-binding from a user/contributor) - pulled down the artifacts and did the maven tests on them.  Got it to complete, but on one of the test runs I got test failures for TestPauseTransitService and TestSshActionExecutor.  I think those may need to just be looked at for completion consistency and not anything to do with the code their testing.

On Feb 17, 2012, at 1:59 PM, Mayank Bansal wrote:

> +1
> 
> looks good.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mayank
> 
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Chris,
>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>> 
>> Yes
>> 
>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at
>> this stage?
>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>> 
>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Mohammad
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
>> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>> 
>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>> 
>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>> 
>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>> 
>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>> problem. -C
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> Chris,
>>>> 
>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where
>> from
>>>> the IPMC.
>>>> 
>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
>> lines.
>>>> 
>>>> Thxs.
>>>> 
>>>> Alejandro
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>>> better.
>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
>> whole
>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
>> good.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
>> 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
>> subdirectory
>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
>> can
>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
>> created
>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>> 
>> 


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

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mohamed Battisha <mb...@live.com>.

+1
Downloaded the source and ran the unit tests

Things look fine 

Thanks!
Mohamed

On Feb 17, 2012, at 11:59 AM, Mayank Bansal wrote:

> +1
> 
> looks good.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mayank
> 
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Chris,
>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>> 
>> Yes
>> 
>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at
>> this stage?
>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>> 
>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Mohammad
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
>> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>> 
>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>> 
>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>> 
>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>> 
>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>> problem. -C
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> Chris,
>>>> 
>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where
>> from
>>>> the IPMC.
>>>> 
>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
>> lines.
>>>> 
>>>> Thxs.
>>>> 
>>>> Alejandro
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>>> better.
>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
>> whole
>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
>> good.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
>> 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
>> subdirectory
>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
>> can
>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
>> created
>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>> 
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mohamed Battisha <mb...@live.com>.

+1
Downloaded the source and ran the unit tests

Things look fine 

Thanks!
Mohamed

On Feb 17, 2012, at 11:59 AM, Mayank Bansal wrote:

> +1
> 
> looks good.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mayank
> 
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Chris,
>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>> 
>> Yes
>> 
>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at
>> this stage?
>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>> 
>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Mohammad
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
>> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>> 
>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>> 
>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>> 
>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>> 
>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>> problem. -C
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> Chris,
>>>> 
>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where
>> from
>>>> the IPMC.
>>>> 
>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
>> lines.
>>>> 
>>>> Thxs.
>>>> 
>>>> Alejandro
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>>> better.
>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
>> whole
>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
>> good.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
>> 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
>> subdirectory
>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
>> can
>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
>> created
>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>> 
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Jeremy Hanna <je...@gmail.com>.

+1 (non-binding from a user/contributor) - pulled down the artifacts and did the maven tests on them.  Got it to complete, but on one of the test runs I got test failures for TestPauseTransitService and TestSshActionExecutor.  I think those may need to just be looked at for completion consistency and not anything to do with the code their testing.

On Feb 17, 2012, at 1:59 PM, Mayank Bansal wrote:

> +1
> 
> looks good.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mayank
> 
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Chris,
>>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>> 
>> Yes
>> 
>>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at
>> this stage?
>>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>> 
>> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
>> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
>> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Mohammad
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
>> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>> 
>>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>>> series, just as a PMC does.
>>> 
>>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>>> 
>>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>>> 
>>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>>> problem. -C
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> Chris,
>>>> 
>>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where
>> from
>>>> the IPMC.
>>>> 
>>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
>> lines.
>>>> 
>>>> Thxs.
>>>> 
>>>> Alejandro
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>>> better.
>>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
>> whole
>>>>> process smoother.
>>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
>> good.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
>> 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
>> subdirectory
>>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
>> can
>>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
>> created
>>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>> 
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mayank Bansal <ma...@apache.org>.

+1

looks good.

Thanks,
Mayank

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Chris,
> > So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>
> Yes
>
> > As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at
> this stage?
> > 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
> > 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>
> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>
> > Regards,
> > Mohammad
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
> > To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
> >
> > That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
> > impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
> > community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
> > represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
> > series, just as a PMC does.
> >
> > The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
> > cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
> > requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
> > downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
> > that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
> > foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
> > they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
> >
> > Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
> > understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
> > podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
> > because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
> > vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
> > output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
> > the ASF into legal trouble.
> >
> > Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
> > that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
> > round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
> > problem. -C
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >> Chris,
> >>
> >> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where
> from
> >> the IPMC.
> >>
> >> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
> lines.
> >>
> >> Thxs.
> >>
> >> Alejandro
> >>
> >> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
> >>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
> >>>
> >>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
> >>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
> >>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
> >>> please weigh in? -C
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > Hi All,
> >>> > As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
> >>> > The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
> >>> >
> >>> > Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
> >>> better.
> >>> > I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
> whole
> >>> process smoother.
> >>> > Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
> >>> >
> >>> > Regards,
> >>> > Moahmmad
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > ________________________________
> >>> > From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
> >>> > To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>> > Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> >>> > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
> >>> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
> >>> >
> >>> > I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
> good.
> >>> >
> >>> > +1 for the release.
> >>> >
> >>> > On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Hi,
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
> >>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
> >>> >> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
> >>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
> >>> (tucu)
> >>> >> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
> 1.0.0/0.23.1
> >>> (tucu)
> >>> >> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> >>> >> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
> >>> (Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
> >>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
> subdirectory
> >>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> >>> >> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
> >>> failing(Mohamed).
> >>> >> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
> >>> oozie src(Mohammad)
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Keys used to sign the release are available at
> >>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
> can
> >>> be found at the above link.
> >>> >> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
> created
> >>> could be found at :
> >>> >>
> >>>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Regards,
> >>> >> Mohammad
> >>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mayank Bansal <ma...@apache.org>.

+1

looks good.

Thanks,
Mayank

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Chris,
> > So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>
> Yes
>
> > As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at
> this stage?
> > 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
> > 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>
> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>
> > Regards,
> > Mohammad
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
> > To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
> >
> > That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
> > impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
> > community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
> > represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
> > series, just as a PMC does.
> >
> > The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
> > cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
> > requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
> > downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
> > that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
> > foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
> > they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
> >
> > Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
> > understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
> > podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
> > because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
> > vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
> > output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
> > the ASF into legal trouble.
> >
> > Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
> > that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
> > round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
> > problem. -C
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >> Chris,
> >>
> >> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where
> from
> >> the IPMC.
> >>
> >> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
> lines.
> >>
> >> Thxs.
> >>
> >> Alejandro
> >>
> >> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
> >>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
> >>>
> >>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
> >>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
> >>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
> >>> please weigh in? -C
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > Hi All,
> >>> > As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
> >>> > The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
> >>> >
> >>> > Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
> >>> better.
> >>> > I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
> whole
> >>> process smoother.
> >>> > Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
> >>> >
> >>> > Regards,
> >>> > Moahmmad
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > ________________________________
> >>> > From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
> >>> > To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>> > Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> >>> > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
> >>> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
> >>> >
> >>> > I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
> good.
> >>> >
> >>> > +1 for the release.
> >>> >
> >>> > On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Hi,
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
> >>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
> >>> >> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
> >>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
> >>> (tucu)
> >>> >> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
> 1.0.0/0.23.1
> >>> (tucu)
> >>> >> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> >>> >> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
> >>> (Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
> >>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
> subdirectory
> >>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> >>> >> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
> >>> failing(Mohamed).
> >>> >> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
> >>> oozie src(Mohammad)
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Keys used to sign the release are available at
> >>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
> can
> >>> be found at the above link.
> >>> >> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
> created
> >>> could be found at :
> >>> >>
> >>>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Regards,
> >>> >> Mohammad
> >>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mayank Bansal <ma...@apache.org>.

+1

looks good.

Thanks,
Mayank

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Chris,
> > So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
>
> Yes
>
> > As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at
> this stage?
> > 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
> > 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
>
> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
>
> > Regards,
> > Mohammad
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
> > To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "
> oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
> >
> > That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
> > impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
> > community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
> > represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
> > series, just as a PMC does.
> >
> > The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
> > cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
> > requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
> > downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
> > that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
> > foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
> > they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
> >
> > Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
> > understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
> > podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
> > because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
> > vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
> > output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
> > the ASF into legal trouble.
> >
> > Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
> > that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
> > round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
> > problem. -C
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >> Chris,
> >>
> >> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where
> from
> >> the IPMC.
> >>
> >> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same
> lines.
> >>
> >> Thxs.
> >>
> >> Alejandro
> >>
> >> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
> >>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
> >>>
> >>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
> >>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
> >>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
> >>> please weigh in? -C
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > Hi All,
> >>> > As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
> >>> > The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
> >>> >
> >>> > Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
> >>> better.
> >>> > I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the
> whole
> >>> process smoother.
> >>> > Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
> >>> >
> >>> > Regards,
> >>> > Moahmmad
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > ________________________________
> >>> > From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
> >>> > To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>> > Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> >>> > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
> >>> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
> >>> >
> >>> > I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks
> good.
> >>> >
> >>> > +1 for the release.
> >>> >
> >>> > On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Hi,
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
> >>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
> >>> >> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
> >>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
> >>> (tucu)
> >>> >> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop
> 1.0.0/0.23.1
> >>> (tucu)
> >>> >> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> >>> >> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
> >>> (Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
> >>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> >>> >> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty
> subdirectory
> >>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> >>> >> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
> >>> failing(Mohamed).
> >>> >> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
> >>> oozie src(Mohammad)
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Keys used to sign the release are available at
> >>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all
> can
> >>> be found at the above link.
> >>> >> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was
> created
> >>> could be found at :
> >>> >>
> >>>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Regards,
> >>> >> Mohammad
> >>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Virag Kothari <vi...@yahoo-inc.com>.

Hi,

Downloaded the source, ran the test cases - all works fine!
+1

Thanks,
Virag

On 2/17/12 3:38 AM, "Chris Douglas" <cd...@apache.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Hi Chris,
>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
> 
> Yes
> 
>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at this
>> stage?
>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
> 
> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
> 
>> Regards,
>> Mohammad
>> 
>> 
>> ________________________________
>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "oozie-users@incubator.apache.org"
>> <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>> 
>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>> series, just as a PMC does.
>> 
>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>> 
>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>> 
>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>> problem. -C
>> 
>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Chris,
>>> 
>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where from
>>> the IPMC.
>>> 
>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same lines.
>>> 
>>> Thxs.
>>> 
>>> Alejandro
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>> 
>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>> better.
>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
>>>> process smoother.
>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>> 
>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>>>>> 
>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can
>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>> 
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>> 


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

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Virag Kothari <vi...@yahoo-inc.com>.

Hi,

Downloaded the source, ran the test cases - all works fine!
+1

Thanks,
Virag

On 2/17/12 3:38 AM, "Chris Douglas" <cd...@apache.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Hi Chris,
>> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
> 
> Yes
> 
>> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at this
>> stage?
>> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
>> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user
> 
> Might as well show support/express reservations on the
> general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
> thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C
> 
>> Regards,
>> Mohammad
>> 
>> 
>> ________________________________
>> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "oozie-users@incubator.apache.org"
>> <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>> 
>> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
>> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
>> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
>> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
>> series, just as a PMC does.
>> 
>> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
>> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
>> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
>> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
>> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
>> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
>> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>> 
>> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
>> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
>> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
>> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
>> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
>> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
>> the ASF into legal trouble.
>> 
>> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
>> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
>> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
>> problem. -C
>> 
>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Chris,
>>> 
>>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where from
>>> the IPMC.
>>> 
>>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same lines.
>>> 
>>> Thxs.
>>> 
>>> Alejandro
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>> 
>>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>>>> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>>> better.
>>>>> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
>>>> process smoother.
>>>>> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Moahmmad
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>>>> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>>>> 
>>>>> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>>>>> 
>>>>> +1 for the release.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>>>>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>>>>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>>> (tucu)
>>>>>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>>>>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>>> (Mohammad)
>>>>>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>>>>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>>>>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>>>>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
>>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>>>>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>>>>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can
>>>> be found at the above link.
>>>>>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
>>>> could be found at :
>>>>>> 
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Mohammad
>>>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>.

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi Chris,
> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?

Yes

> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at this stage?
> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user

Might as well show support/express reservations on the
general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C

> Regards,
> Mohammad
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>
> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
> series, just as a PMC does.
>
> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>
> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
> the ASF into legal trouble.
>
> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
> problem. -C
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>> Chris,
>>
>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where from
>> the IPMC.
>>
>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same lines.
>>
>> Thxs.
>>
>> Alejandro
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>
>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi All,
>>> > As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>> > The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>> >
>>> > Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>> better.
>>> > I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
>>> process smoother.
>>> > Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Moahmmad
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ________________________________
>>> > From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>> > To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> > Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>> >
>>> > I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>>> >
>>> > +1 for the release.
>>> >
>>> > On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Hi,
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>> >>
>>> >> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>> >> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>> >>
>>> >> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>> >> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>> (tucu)
>>> >> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>> (tucu)
>>> >> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>> >> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>> (Mohammad)
>>> >> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>> >> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>> >> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>> >> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>> >> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>> >> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>> >>
>>> >> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>> >>
>>> >> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>> >>
>>> >> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>> >>
>>> >> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can
>>> be found at the above link.
>>> >> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
>>> could be found at :
>>> >>
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>> >>
>>> >> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>> >>
>>> >> Regards,
>>> >> Mohammad
>>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>.

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi Chris,
> So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?

Yes

> As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at this stage?
> 1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
> 2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user

Might as well show support/express reservations on the
general@incubator thread so it's in one place. IIRC the general@
thread cc'd oozie-dev. -C

> Regards,
> Mohammad
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>
> That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
> impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
> community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
> represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
> series, just as a PMC does.
>
> The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
> cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
> requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
> downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
> that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
> foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
> they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).
>
> Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
> understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
> podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
> because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
> vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
> output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
> the ASF into legal trouble.
>
> Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
> that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
> round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
> problem. -C
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>> Chris,
>>
>> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where from
>> the IPMC.
>>
>> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same lines.
>>
>> Thxs.
>>
>> Alejandro
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>>
>>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>>> please weigh in? -C
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi All,
>>> > As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>>> > The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>>> >
>>> > Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>>> better.
>>> > I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
>>> process smoother.
>>> > Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Moahmmad
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ________________________________
>>> > From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>>> > To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> > Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>>> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>>> >
>>> > I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>>> >
>>> > +1 for the release.
>>> >
>>> > On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Hi,
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>> >>
>>> >> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>>> >> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>> >>
>>> >> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>>> >> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>>> (tucu)
>>> >> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
>>> (tucu)
>>> >> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>>> >> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>>> (Mohammad)
>>> >> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>>> >> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>>> >> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>>> >> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
>>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>>> >> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>>> failing(Mohamed).
>>> >> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>>> >>
>>> >> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>> >>
>>> >> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>> >>
>>> >> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>> >>
>>> >> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can
>>> be found at the above link.
>>> >> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
>>> could be found at :
>>> >>
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>> >>
>>> >> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>> >>
>>> >> Regards,
>>> >> Mohammad
>>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>.

Hi Chris,
So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at this stage?
1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user

Regards,
Mohammad


________________________________
From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org 
Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org> 
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
series, just as a PMC does.

The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).

Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
the ASF into legal trouble.

Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
problem. -C

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> Chris,
>
> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where from
> the IPMC.
>
> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same lines.
>
> Thxs.
>
> Alejandro
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>
>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>> please weigh in? -C
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi All,
>> > As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>> > The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>> >
>> > Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>> better.
>> > I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
>> process smoother.
>> > Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Moahmmad
>> >
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>> > To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> > Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>> >
>> > I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>> >
>> > +1 for the release.
>> >
>> > On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>> >>
>> >> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>> >> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>> >>
>> >> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>> (tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
>> (tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>> (Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>> failing(Mohamed).
>> >> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>> >>
>> >> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>> >>
>> >> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>> >>
>> >> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>> >>
>> >> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can
>> be found at the above link.
>> >> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
>> could be found at :
>> >>
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>> >>
>> >> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Mohammad
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>.

Hi Chris,
So can the other contributors/committers VOTE now?
As oozie-user VOTE is already closed, what would be the best option at this stage?
1. Go to genenral@incubator and vote there.
2. Vote in the same threadat oozie-user

Regards,
Mohammad


________________________________
From: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org 
Cc: Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>; "oozie-users@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org> 
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:13 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
series, just as a PMC does.

The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).

Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
the ASF into legal trouble.

Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
problem. -C

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> Chris,
>
> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where from
> the IPMC.
>
> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same lines.
>
> Thxs.
>
> Alejandro
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>
>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>> please weigh in? -C
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi All,
>> > As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>> > The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>> >
>> > Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>> better.
>> > I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
>> process smoother.
>> > Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Moahmmad
>> >
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>> > To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> > Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>> >
>> > I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>> >
>> > +1 for the release.
>> >
>> > On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>> >>
>> >> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>> >> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>> >>
>> >> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>> (tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
>> (tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>> (Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>> failing(Mohamed).
>> >> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>> >>
>> >> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>> >>
>> >> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>> >>
>> >> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>> >>
>> >> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can
>> be found at the above link.
>> >> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
>> could be found at :
>> >>
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>> >>
>> >> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Mohammad
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>.

That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
series, just as a PMC does.

The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).

Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
the ASF into legal trouble.

Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
problem. -C

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> Chris,
>
> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where from
> the IPMC.
>
> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same lines.
>
> Thxs.
>
> Alejandro
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>
>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>> please weigh in? -C
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi All,
>> > As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>> > The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>> >
>> > Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>> better.
>> > I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
>> process smoother.
>> > Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Moahmmad
>> >
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>> > To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> > Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>> >
>> > I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>> >
>> > +1 for the release.
>> >
>> > On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>> >>
>> >> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>> >> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>> >>
>> >> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>> (tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
>> (tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>> (Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>> failing(Mohamed).
>> >> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>> >>
>> >> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>> >>
>> >> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>> >>
>> >> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>> >>
>> >> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can
>> be found at the above link.
>> >> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
>> could be found at :
>> >>
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>> >>
>> >> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Mohammad
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>.

That's a pretty dire error in the documentation if that's the
impression. Projects (and podlings) are responsible for their code,
community, and releases. The PPMC certifies that the artifact
represents an iteration of its progress by voting on a release in some
series, just as a PMC does.

The IPMC has a functionary, mundane role. It's supposed to make
cursory checks: code being released respects the licensing
requirements of dependencies, notices give accurate guidance to
downstream consumers of that code, etc. Since the ASF is releasing
that code under license, the idea is that IPMC members protect the
foundation from common misunderstandings (e.g. if a podling thought
they could release GPL'd code, someone else's code, etc.).

Once the project has some experience with releases, a clear
understanding of what the ASF wants w.r.t. community, etc. then
podling graduates. Before that, the voting guidelines are necessary
because the IPMC members are acting on behalf of the foundation. The
vote from the PPMC expresses that the artifact represents their
output. The vote from the IPMC certifies that the artifact won't get
the ASF into legal trouble.

Release votes are a strict majority per ASF bylaws. AFAICT, asserting
that the IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding in the second
round is just adding a layer of indirection to solve a counting
problem. -C

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> Chris,
>
> I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where from
> the IPMC.
>
> I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same lines.
>
> Thxs.
>
> Alejandro
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
>> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>>
>> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
>> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
>> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
>> please weigh in? -C
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi All,
>> > As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
>> > The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>> >
>> > Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
>> better.
>> > I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
>> process smoother.
>> > Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Moahmmad
>> >
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
>> > To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> > Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>> >
>> > I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>> >
>> > +1 for the release.
>> >
>> > On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>> >>
>> >> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
>> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>> >> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>> >>
>> >> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
>> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
>> (tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
>> (tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
>> (Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
>> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>> >> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
>> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>> >> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
>> failing(Mohamed).
>> >> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
>> oozie src(Mohammad)
>> >>
>> >> Keys used to sign the release are available at
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>> >>
>> >> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>> >>
>> >> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>> >>
>> >> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can
>> be found at the above link.
>> >> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
>> could be found at :
>> >>
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>> >>
>> >> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Mohammad
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>.

Chris,

I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where from
the IPMC.

I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same lines.

Thxs.

Alejandro

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:

> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>
> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
> please weigh in? -C
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
> > The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
> >
> > Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
> better.
> > I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
> process smoother.
> > Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
> >
> > Regards,
> > Moahmmad
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
> > To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
> >
> > I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
> >
> > +1 for the release.
> >
> > On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> >>
> >> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
> >> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> >>
> >> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> >> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
> (tucu)
> >> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
> (tucu)
> >> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> >> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
> (Mohammad)
> >> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> >> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> >> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> >> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> >> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
> failing(Mohamed).
> >> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
> oozie src(Mohammad)
> >>
> >> Keys used to sign the release are available at
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> >>
> >> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> >>
> >> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> >>
> >> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can
> be found at the above link.
> >> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
> could be found at :
> >>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> >>
> >> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Mohammad
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Alejandro Abdelnur <tu...@cloudera.com>.

Chris,

I'm a bit confused here, I've thought that the significant votes where from
the IPMC.

I guess most of the committers/contributors thought along the same lines.

Thxs.

Alejandro

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org> wrote:

> The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
> none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.
>
> The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
> and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
> than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
> please weigh in? -C
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
> > The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
> >
> > Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it
> better.
> > I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole
> process smoother.
> > Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
> >
> > Regards,
> > Moahmmad
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
> > To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
> >
> > I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
> >
> > +1 for the release.
> >
> > On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> >>
> >> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating
> most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
> >> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> >>
> >> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate
> hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> >> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version
> (tucu)
> >> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1
> (tucu)
> >> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> >> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information.
> (Mohammad)
> >> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all
> pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> >> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> >> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> >> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory
> for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> >> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are
> failing(Mohamed).
> >> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into
> oozie src(Mohammad)
> >>
> >> Keys used to sign the release are available at
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> >>
> >> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> >>
> >> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> >>
> >> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can
> be found at the above link.
> >> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created
> could be found at :
> >>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> >>
> >> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Mohammad
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>.

The vote didn't attract any votes from contributors. As far as I know,
none of the voters in this thread actually develop Oozie.

The IPMC vote is a check on the podling's compliance with licensing
and other foundation-level practices. It's far, far less significant
than the community's appraisal of the release itself. Would the PPMC
please weigh in? -C

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
> As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote.
> The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.
>
> Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it better.
> I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole process smoother.
> Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator
>
> Regards,
> Moahmmad
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
> To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)
>
> I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.
>
> +1 for the release.
>
> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>>
>> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
>> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>>
>> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
>> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
>> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1 (tucu)
>> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
>> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information. (Mohammad)
>> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all pom.xml.(Mohammad)
>> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
>> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
>> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory for docs. (rvs via tucu)
>> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are failing(Mohamed).
>> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie src(Mohammad)
>>
>> Keys used to sign the release are available at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>>
>> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>>
>> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be found at the above link.
>> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created could be found at :
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>>
>> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Mohammad

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>.

Hi All,
As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote. 
The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.

Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it better. 
I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole process smoother.
Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator

Regards,
Moahmmad


________________________________
From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org 
Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.

+1 for the release.

On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> 
> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most of the comments (including Chris's finding). 
> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> 
> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1 (tucu)
> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information. (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are failing(Mohamed).
> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie src(Mohammad)
> 
> Keys used to sign the release are available at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> 
> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> 
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> 
> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be found at the above link.
> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created could be found at :
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> 
> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> 
> Regards,
> Mohammad

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>.

Hi All,
As 72 hours has passed, I would like to close the vote. 
The proposed RC-2 got three +1s from three mentors without -1 or 0.

Special thanks to mentors who gave their valuable feedback to make it better. 
I also want to mention Alejandro and Virag who helped to make the whole process smoother.
Now I will ask for vote in general@incubator

Regards,
Moahmmad


________________________________
From: Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>
To: oozie-dev@incubator.apache.org 
Cc: Oozie-users <oo...@incubator.apache.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:42 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.

+1 for the release.

On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> 
> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most of the comments (including Chris's finding). 
> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> 
> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1 (tucu)
> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information. (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are failing(Mohamed).
> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie src(Mohammad)
> 
> Keys used to sign the release are available at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> 
> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> 
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> 
> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be found at the above link.
> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created could be found at :
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> 
> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> 
> Regards,
> Mohammad

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>.

I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.

+1 for the release.

On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> 
> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most of the comments (including Chris's finding). 
> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> 
> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1 (tucu)
> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information. (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are failing(Mohamed).
> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie src(Mohammad)
> 
> Keys used to sign the release are available at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> 
> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> 
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> 
> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be found at the above link.
> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created could be found at :
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> 
> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> 
> Regards,
> Mohammad

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>.

+1 -C

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
>
> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most of the comments (including Chris's finding).
> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
>
> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1 (tucu)
> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information. (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are failing(Mohamed).
> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie src(Mohammad)
>
> Keys used to sign the release are available at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
>
> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
>
> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be found at the above link.
> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created could be found at :
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
>
> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
>
> Regards,
> Mohammad

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>.

Hi Alan,
Thanks for the review and comments.


For the test cases failure:

It is the timing issue. Sometime it depends on the load of the machine too.
Anyway there are multiple ways to make the test cases succeed:
1. Quicker approach: Run only the failed test case.  such as "mvn ..... -Dtest=TestLauncher -Doozie.test.waitfor.ratio=4"
2. For whole test suites: "mvn ... -Doozie.test.waitfor.ratio=4"

Regards,
Mohammad




----- Original Message -----
From: Alan Gates <ga...@hortonworks.com>
To: oozie-users@incubator.apache.org
Cc: oozie-dev <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

+1  Checked out the LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, and readme.txt files.  They all look good.  I compiled and ran the tests.  I did see one test failure in the unit tests (org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.TestLauncher failed).  I'll let you decide if that's a show stopper or not.

Alan.

On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> 
> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most of the comments (including Chris's finding). 
> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> 
> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1 (tucu)
> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information. (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are failing(Mohamed).
> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie src(Mohammad)
> 
> Keys used to sign the release are available at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> 
> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> 
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> 
> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be found at the above link.
> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created could be found at :
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> 
> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> 
> Regards,
> Mohammad

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Mohammad Islam <mi...@yahoo.com>.

Hi Alan,
Thanks for the review and comments.


For the test cases failure:

It is the timing issue. Sometime it depends on the load of the machine too.
Anyway there are multiple ways to make the test cases succeed:
1. Quicker approach: Run only the failed test case.  such as "mvn ..... -Dtest=TestLauncher -Doozie.test.waitfor.ratio=4"
2. For whole test suites: "mvn ... -Doozie.test.waitfor.ratio=4"

Regards,
Mohammad




----- Original Message -----
From: Alan Gates <ga...@hortonworks.com>
To: oozie-users@incubator.apache.org
Cc: oozie-dev <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

+1  Checked out the LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, and readme.txt files.  They all look good.  I compiled and ran the tests.  I did see one test failure in the unit tests (org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.TestLauncher failed).  I'll let you decide if that's a show stopper or not.

Alan.

On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> 
> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most of the comments (including Chris's finding). 
> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> 
> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1 (tucu)
> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information. (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are failing(Mohamed).
> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie src(Mohammad)
> 
> Keys used to sign the release are available at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> 
> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> 
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> 
> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be found at the above link.
> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created could be found at :
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> 
> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> 
> Regards,
> Mohammad

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Alan Gates <ga...@hortonworks.com>.

+1  Checked out the LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, and readme.txt files.  They all look good.  I compiled and ran the tests.  I did see one test failure in the unit tests (org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.TestLauncher failed).  I'll let you decide if that's a show stopper or not.

Alan.

On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> 
> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most of the comments (including Chris's finding). 
> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> 
> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1 (tucu)
> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information. (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are failing(Mohamed).
> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie src(Mohammad)
> 
> Keys used to sign the release are available at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> 
> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> 
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> 
> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be found at the above link.
> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created could be found at :
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> 
> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> 
> Regards,
> Mohammad

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Alan Gates <ga...@hortonworks.com>.

+1  Checked out the LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, and readme.txt files.  They all look good.  I compiled and ran the tests.  I did see one test failure in the unit tests (org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.TestLauncher failed).  I'll let you decide if that's a show stopper or not.

Alan.

On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> 
> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most of the comments (including Chris's finding). 
> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> 
> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1 (tucu)
> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information. (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are failing(Mohamed).
> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie src(Mohammad)
> 
> Keys used to sign the release are available at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> 
> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> 
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> 
> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be found at the above link.
> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created could be found at :
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> 
> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> 
> Regards,
> Mohammad

Re: [VOTE] Release Oozie 3.1.3 (candidate 2)

Posted by Devaraj Das <dd...@hortonworks.com>.

I ran the tests and also inspected the top level txt files. Looks good.

+1 for the release.

On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Mohammad Islam wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Thanks everyone for giving valuable comments for the RC0 and RC1.
> 
> I created a new candidate (RC2) build for Oozie-3.1.3 incorporating most of the comments (including Chris's finding). 
> The following JIRAs were resolved based on the comments:
> 
> OOZIE-694 Update the Install and Quick start guide with appropriate hadoop versions for branch-3.1 (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-602 Update the Hadoop version to be an Apache Hadoop version (tucu)
> OOZIE-689 XTestCase proxyuser settings fails with Hadoop 1.0.0/0.23.1 (tucu)
> OOZIE-601 Oozie's POMs should use org.apache.oozie as group (tucu)
> OOZIE-685 Update License file with 3rd party license information. (Mohammad)
> OOZIE-682 Update version 3.1.3 to 3.1.3-incubating in all pom.xml.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-683 Add DISCLAIMER file in the root.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-681 Update readme.txt contents.(Mohammad)
> OOZIE-680 oozie's assembly creates an extra level of empty subdirectory for docs. (rvs via tucu)
> OOZIE-608 testCoordChangeEndTime and testCoordChangeXCommand are failing(Mohamed).
> OOZIE-678 Update NOTICE.txt to reflect the workcount binaries into oozie src(Mohammad)
> 
> Keys used to sign the release are available at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/oozie/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
> 
> Please download, test, and try it out from here:
> 
> http://people.apache.org/~kamrul/oozie-3.1.3-incubating-candidate-2/
> 
> The release log, md5 signature, gpg signature, and rat report all can be found at the above link.
> In case, anyone is interested, the svn tag from the release was created could be found at :
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/oozie/tags/release-3.1.3-rc2/
> 
> Should we release this? Vote closes on Feb 15th.
> 
> Regards,
> Mohammad