You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@parquet.apache.org by Ryan Blue <bl...@apache.org> on 2015/02/07 02:02:24 UTC
[VOTE] Release Apache Parquet Format (Incubating) 2.3.0 RC1
Hi everyone,
I propose the following RC to be released as official Apache Parquet
2.3.0 release.
The commit id is b02af711c858fec3731f18a5f1e95573757fac6e
* This corresponds to the tag: apache-parquet-format-2.3.0
* https://github.com/apache/incubator-parquet-format/tree/b02af71
*
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/repo?p=incubator-parquet-format.git&a=commit&h=b02af711c858fec3731f18a5f1e95573757fac6e
The release tarball, signature, and checksums are here:
*
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/parquet/apache-parquet-format-2.3.0-rc1/
You can find the KEYS file here:
* https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/parquet/KEYS
Binary artifacts are staged in Nexus here:
*
https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/parquet/parquet-format/
Parquet Format 2.3.0 is functionally identical to the 2.2.0 release, but
the classes have been moved to the org.apache.parquet package and the
maven groupId is now org.apache.parquet.
Please download, verify, and test.
Because it is nearly the weekend, please vote by Tuesday morning, 10
February.
[ ] +1 Release this as Apache Parquet Format 2.3.0
[ ] +0
[ ] -1 Do not release this because...
--
Ryan Blue
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Parquet Format (Incubating) 2.3.0 RC1
Posted by Julien Le Dem <ju...@twitter.com.INVALID>.
this rc is for parquet-format so you have time to provide a patch for
parquet-mr.
parquet-mr will follow later.
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 1:27 PM, lukas nalezenec <lu...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
> I would like to commit PARQUET-175
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PARQUET-175> before release.
> Its small improvement but it can affect architectural decisions a lot -
> without this commit parquet-protobuf can read only data written by
> parquet-protobuf.
>
>
> https://github.com/lukasnalezenec/incubator-parquet-mr/commits/master
>
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 7:11 PM, Julien Le Dem <julien@twitter.com.invalid
> >
> wrote:
>
> > It sounds like it. I started a thread on the incubator mailing list about
> > this.
> > But yes it is the official guideline, so we have to comply.
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Ryan Blue <bl...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 02/10/2015 02:56 PM, Julien Le Dem wrote:
> > >
> > >> changing the artifact name will break the conflict resolution when the
> > >> project is not incubating anymore.
> > >> we should not change the artifact names (again) when we get out of the
> > >> incubator.
> > >>
> > >> I finally found the guideline Tom was referring to:
> > >>
> > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/release-java.html#best-practice-maven
> > >> "It is best to use the groupId and artifactId that will be used upon
> > >> graduation. The version should includeincubating (or incubator) to
> > ensure
> > >> that the artifacts created comply with Incubator release policy
> > >> <
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases
> > >"
> > >>
> > >
> > > In that case, I think the most reasonable thing is to add it to the
> > > version string. Do you agree, Julien?
> > >
> > >
> > > rb
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ryan Blue
> > > Software Engineer
> > > Cloudera, Inc.
> > >
> >
>
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Parquet Format (Incubating) 2.3.0
RC1
Posted by Ryan Blue <bl...@cloudera.com>.
On 02/11/2015 01:27 PM, lukas nalezenec wrote:
> Hi,
> I would like to commit PARQUET-175
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PARQUET-175> before release.
> Its small improvement but it can affect architectural decisions a lot -
> without this commit parquet-protobuf can read only data written by
> parquet-protobuf.
>
>
> https://github.com/lukasnalezenec/incubator-parquet-mr/commits/master
This looks like something we should be able to get into the parquet-mr
release without a problem.
This vote was for the parquet-format release, which is just a move from
com.twitter naming to org.apache naming. I'll be pushing for the
parquet-mr release next.
rb
--
Ryan Blue
Software Engineer
Cloudera, Inc.
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Parquet Format (Incubating) 2.3.0 RC1
Posted by lukas nalezenec <lu...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I would like to commit PARQUET-175
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PARQUET-175> before release.
Its small improvement but it can affect architectural decisions a lot -
without this commit parquet-protobuf can read only data written by
parquet-protobuf.
https://github.com/lukasnalezenec/incubator-parquet-mr/commits/master
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 7:11 PM, Julien Le Dem <ju...@twitter.com.invalid>
wrote:
> It sounds like it. I started a thread on the incubator mailing list about
> this.
> But yes it is the official guideline, so we have to comply.
>
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Ryan Blue <bl...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > On 02/10/2015 02:56 PM, Julien Le Dem wrote:
> >
> >> changing the artifact name will break the conflict resolution when the
> >> project is not incubating anymore.
> >> we should not change the artifact names (again) when we get out of the
> >> incubator.
> >>
> >> I finally found the guideline Tom was referring to:
> >>
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/release-java.html#best-practice-maven
> >> "It is best to use the groupId and artifactId that will be used upon
> >> graduation. The version should includeincubating (or incubator) to
> ensure
> >> that the artifacts created comply with Incubator release policy
> >> <http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases
> >"
> >>
> >
> > In that case, I think the most reasonable thing is to add it to the
> > version string. Do you agree, Julien?
> >
> >
> > rb
> >
> >
> > --
> > Ryan Blue
> > Software Engineer
> > Cloudera, Inc.
> >
>
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Parquet Format (Incubating) 2.3.0 RC1
Posted by Julien Le Dem <ju...@twitter.com.INVALID>.
It sounds like it. I started a thread on the incubator mailing list about
this.
But yes it is the official guideline, so we have to comply.
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Ryan Blue <bl...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> On 02/10/2015 02:56 PM, Julien Le Dem wrote:
>
>> changing the artifact name will break the conflict resolution when the
>> project is not incubating anymore.
>> we should not change the artifact names (again) when we get out of the
>> incubator.
>>
>> I finally found the guideline Tom was referring to:
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/release-java.html#best-practice-maven
>> "It is best to use the groupId and artifactId that will be used upon
>> graduation. The version should includeincubating (or incubator) to ensure
>> that the artifacts created comply with Incubator release policy
>> <http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases>"
>>
>
> In that case, I think the most reasonable thing is to add it to the
> version string. Do you agree, Julien?
>
>
> rb
>
>
> --
> Ryan Blue
> Software Engineer
> Cloudera, Inc.
>
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Parquet Format (Incubating) 2.3.0
RC1
Posted by Ryan Blue <bl...@cloudera.com>.
On 02/10/2015 02:56 PM, Julien Le Dem wrote:
> changing the artifact name will break the conflict resolution when the
> project is not incubating anymore.
> we should not change the artifact names (again) when we get out of the
> incubator.
>
> I finally found the guideline Tom was referring to:
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/release-java.html#best-practice-maven
> "It is best to use the groupId and artifactId that will be used upon
> graduation. The version should includeincubating (or incubator) to ensure
> that the artifacts created comply with Incubator release policy
> <http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases>"
In that case, I think the most reasonable thing is to add it to the
version string. Do you agree, Julien?
rb
--
Ryan Blue
Software Engineer
Cloudera, Inc.
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Parquet Format (Incubating) 2.3.0 RC1
Posted by Julien Le Dem <ju...@twitter.com.INVALID>.
changing the artifact name will break the conflict resolution when the
project is not incubating anymore.
we should not change the artifact names (again) when we get out of the
incubator.
I finally found the guideline Tom was referring to:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/release-java.html#best-practice-maven
"It is best to use the groupId and artifactId that will be used upon
graduation. The version should includeincubating (or incubator) to ensure
that the artifacts created comply with Incubator release policy
<http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases>"
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Ryan Blue <bl...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> On 02/10/2015 02:23 PM, Julien Le Dem wrote:
>
>> I thought we had that discussion before and the conclusion was that the
>> source release is the actual release and the one that needs -incubating in
>> the name.
>> In particular in
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list
>> "3.6 Release consists of source code only, no binaries."
>>
>> adding "-incubating" in the version breaks the SemVer semantics (
>> http://semver.org/) "A pre-release version MAY be denoted by appending a
>> hyphen and a series of dot separated identifiers immediately following the
>> patch version".
>>
>> I'm against adding -incubating in the version. The version is 2.3.0 here.
>> maven artifacts are generated from the source release as convenience to
>> other projects.
>>
>> +1 on the release.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Tom White <to...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>
>> File names (including binary files) need to include "-incubating" in
>>> them [1]. This is usually achieved by including it in the version
>>> string, e.g. 2.3.0-incubating.
>>>
>>> Otherwise this looks good to me.
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'd like to solve the naming and version issue before bringing this to an
> IPMC vote. With 2 +1s (Brock and Julien), and what I'll call a +0 from Tom,
> this vote does not pass.
>
> I'll go back today and try to add -incubating to the artifacts without
> adding it to the version string. I think the only thing we need to fix is
> the naming for maven artifacts, although removing the .zip that Brock
> pointed out is a good idea to pass in an IPMC vote because it is confusing
> to have two source artifacts. I'll get a new RC out after that.
>
>
> rb
>
> --
> Ryan Blue
> Software Engineer
> Cloudera, Inc.
>
[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Parquet Format (Incubating) 2.3.0
RC1
Posted by Ryan Blue <bl...@cloudera.com>.
On 02/10/2015 02:23 PM, Julien Le Dem wrote:
> I thought we had that discussion before and the conclusion was that the
> source release is the actual release and the one that needs -incubating in
> the name.
> In particular in
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list
> "3.6 Release consists of source code only, no binaries."
>
> adding "-incubating" in the version breaks the SemVer semantics (
> http://semver.org/) "A pre-release version MAY be denoted by appending a
> hyphen and a series of dot separated identifiers immediately following the
> patch version".
>
> I'm against adding -incubating in the version. The version is 2.3.0 here.
> maven artifacts are generated from the source release as convenience to
> other projects.
>
> +1 on the release.
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Tom White <to...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
>> File names (including binary files) need to include "-incubating" in
>> them [1]. This is usually achieved by including it in the version
>> string, e.g. 2.3.0-incubating.
>>
>> Otherwise this looks good to me.
>>
>> Tom
Hi everyone,
I'd like to solve the naming and version issue before bringing this to
an IPMC vote. With 2 +1s (Brock and Julien), and what I'll call a +0
from Tom, this vote does not pass.
I'll go back today and try to add -incubating to the artifacts without
adding it to the version string. I think the only thing we need to fix
is the naming for maven artifacts, although removing the .zip that Brock
pointed out is a good idea to pass in an IPMC vote because it is
confusing to have two source artifacts. I'll get a new RC out after that.
rb
--
Ryan Blue
Software Engineer
Cloudera, Inc.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Parquet Format (Incubating) 2.3.0 RC1
Posted by Julien Le Dem <ju...@twitter.com.INVALID>.
I thought we had that discussion before and the conclusion was that the
source release is the actual release and the one that needs -incubating in
the name.
In particular in
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list
"3.6 Release consists of source code only, no binaries."
adding "-incubating" in the version breaks the SemVer semantics (
http://semver.org/) "A pre-release version MAY be denoted by appending a
hyphen and a series of dot separated identifiers immediately following the
patch version".
I'm against adding -incubating in the version. The version is 2.3.0 here.
maven artifacts are generated from the source release as convenience to
other projects.
+1 on the release.
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Tom White <to...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> File names (including binary files) need to include "-incubating" in
> them [1]. This is usually achieved by including it in the version
> string, e.g. 2.3.0-incubating.
>
> Otherwise this looks good to me.
>
> Tom
>
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list
>
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Brock Noland <br...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Ryan Blue <bl...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 02/08/2015 06:10 PM, Brock Noland wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>> checked out NOTICE, LICENSE, all java files, etc and compiled source.
> >>>
> >>> misc: I don't understand why the maven repo has
> >>> "parquet-format-2.3.0-source-release.zip"
> >>>
> >>
> >> This is created by the maven plugin. I'll add it to the release process
> to
> >> delete this or update maven not to produce one, since it isn't needed.
> >
> > gotcha
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> nit: the maven repo has .asc.md5 and .asc.sha1 files which can be
> deleted
> >>> manually from the gui before closing the repo, but it's not required.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Is it best practice? Any idea why the maven plugin would produce these
> if
> >> they should be deleted by hand?
> >
> >
> > Not sure. I just noticed the Whirr release guide said delete them and I
> > have been coping it ever since. Generally it feels "cleaner" but has no
> > practical impact.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> rb
> >>
> >> --
> >> Ryan Blue
> >> Software Engineer
> >> Cloudera, Inc.
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Parquet Format (Incubating) 2.3.0 RC1
Posted by Tom White <to...@cloudera.com>.
File names (including binary files) need to include "-incubating" in
them [1]. This is usually achieved by including it in the version
string, e.g. 2.3.0-incubating.
Otherwise this looks good to me.
Tom
[1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Brock Noland <br...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Ryan Blue <bl...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
>> On 02/08/2015 06:10 PM, Brock Noland wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> checked out NOTICE, LICENSE, all java files, etc and compiled source.
>>>
>>> misc: I don't understand why the maven repo has
>>> "parquet-format-2.3.0-source-release.zip"
>>>
>>
>> This is created by the maven plugin. I'll add it to the release process to
>> delete this or update maven not to produce one, since it isn't needed.
>
> gotcha
>
>>
>>
>> nit: the maven repo has .asc.md5 and .asc.sha1 files which can be deleted
>>> manually from the gui before closing the repo, but it's not required.
>>>
>>
>> Is it best practice? Any idea why the maven plugin would produce these if
>> they should be deleted by hand?
>
>
> Not sure. I just noticed the Whirr release guide said delete them and I
> have been coping it ever since. Generally it feels "cleaner" but has no
> practical impact.
>
>
>>
>>
>> rb
>>
>> --
>> Ryan Blue
>> Software Engineer
>> Cloudera, Inc.
>>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Parquet Format (Incubating) 2.3.0 RC1
Posted by Brock Noland <br...@cloudera.com>.
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Ryan Blue <bl...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> On 02/08/2015 06:10 PM, Brock Noland wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> checked out NOTICE, LICENSE, all java files, etc and compiled source.
>>
>> misc: I don't understand why the maven repo has
>> "parquet-format-2.3.0-source-release.zip"
>>
>
> This is created by the maven plugin. I'll add it to the release process to
> delete this or update maven not to produce one, since it isn't needed.
gotcha
>
>
> nit: the maven repo has .asc.md5 and .asc.sha1 files which can be deleted
>> manually from the gui before closing the repo, but it's not required.
>>
>
> Is it best practice? Any idea why the maven plugin would produce these if
> they should be deleted by hand?
Not sure. I just noticed the Whirr release guide said delete them and I
have been coping it ever since. Generally it feels "cleaner" but has no
practical impact.
>
>
> rb
>
> --
> Ryan Blue
> Software Engineer
> Cloudera, Inc.
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Parquet Format (Incubating) 2.3.0 RC1
Posted by Ryan Blue <bl...@cloudera.com>.
On 02/08/2015 06:10 PM, Brock Noland wrote:
> +1
>
> checked out NOTICE, LICENSE, all java files, etc and compiled source.
>
> misc: I don't understand why the maven repo has
> "parquet-format-2.3.0-source-release.zip"
This is created by the maven plugin. I'll add it to the release process
to delete this or update maven not to produce one, since it isn't needed.
> nit: the maven repo has .asc.md5 and .asc.sha1 files which can be deleted
> manually from the gui before closing the repo, but it's not required.
Is it best practice? Any idea why the maven plugin would produce these
if they should be deleted by hand?
rb
--
Ryan Blue
Software Engineer
Cloudera, Inc.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Parquet Format (Incubating) 2.3.0 RC1
Posted by Brock Noland <br...@cloudera.com>.
+1
checked out NOTICE, LICENSE, all java files, etc and compiled source.
misc: I don't understand why the maven repo has
"parquet-format-2.3.0-source-release.zip"
nit: the maven repo has .asc.md5 and .asc.sha1 files which can be deleted
manually from the gui before closing the repo, but it's not required.
On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Ryan Blue <bl...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I propose the following RC to be released as official Apache Parquet 2.3.0
> release.
>
> The commit id is b02af711c858fec3731f18a5f1e95573757fac6e
> * This corresponds to the tag: apache-parquet-format-2.3.0
> * https://github.com/apache/incubator-parquet-format/tree/b02af71
> * https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/repo?p=
> incubator-parquet-format.git&a=commit&h=b02af711c858fec3731f18a5f1e955
> 73757fac6e
>
> The release tarball, signature, and checksums are here:
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/parquet/
> apache-parquet-format-2.3.0-rc1/
>
> You can find the KEYS file here:
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/parquet/KEYS
>
> Binary artifacts are staged in Nexus here:
> * https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/
> apache/parquet/parquet-format/
>
> Parquet Format 2.3.0 is functionally identical to the 2.2.0 release, but
> the classes have been moved to the org.apache.parquet package and the maven
> groupId is now org.apache.parquet.
>
> Please download, verify, and test.
>
> Because it is nearly the weekend, please vote by Tuesday morning, 10
> February.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Parquet Format 2.3.0
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not release this because...
>
>
> --
> Ryan Blue
>