You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@curator.apache.org by Cameron McKenzie <ca...@apache.org> on 2016/06/15 08:18:10 UTC
[VOTE] Release Apache Curator version 2.11.0 and 3.2.0
Hello,
This is a combined vote to release Apache Curator versions 2.11.0 and 3.2.0
*** Please download, test and vote within approx. 72 hours
Note that we are voting upon the source (tag) and binaries are
provided for convenience.
Link to release notes:
2.1.11 - *https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828>*
3.2.0 - *https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829>*
Staging repos:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/2.11.0/
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/3.2.0/
Binary artifacts:
2.11.0 - *https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
<https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/>*
3.2.0 - https://repository.
apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1034
The tags to be voted upon:
2.11.0 - *https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
<https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7>*
3.2.0 - *https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
<https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc>*
Curator's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
http://www.apache.org/dist/curator/KEYS
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Curator version 2.11.0 and 3.2.0
Posted by Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>.
Ok, I guess I'll put something in the versions section on curator.apache.org
cheers
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 6:08 AM, Mike Drob <ma...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> Yea, as long as you doc it somewhere, it shouldn't be a blocker.
>
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > That's fine with me. You OK with it Mike?
> > On 19 Jun 2016 1:21 AM, "Jordan Zimmerman" <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Can we solve this at a different time? People are waiting on this
> release
> > > and the version number will not affect their applications one bit.
> > >
> > > -Jordan
> > >
> > > > On Jun 18, 2016, at 4:31 AM, Cameron McKenzie <
> mckenzie.cam@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I can see both points of view. In an ideal world we would use the
> > proper
> > > > definition of semantic versioning, but pragmatically, I think that it
> > is
> > > > going to be difficult to maintain with 2 concurrent sets of releases.
> > > So, I
> > > > think that we should just tried with the version numbers suggested.
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > > On 18 Jun 2016 2:09 PM, "Jordan Zimmerman" <
> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I’m very much against bumping the major version number. We’re using
> > the
> > > >> major version number to indicate compatibility with ZooKeeper.
> > > >> Historically, the middle number has represented API compatibility
> for
> > > >> Curator. There’s no reason to change now. We can revisit in the
> > future.
> > > >>
> > > >> -Jordan
> > > >>
> > > >>> On Jun 17, 2016, at 11:04 PM, Cameron McKenzie <
> > mckenzie.cam@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thanks Mike, I will rebuild and get rid of the bin and test
> > > directories.
> > > >> In
> > > >>> regards to the incompatibilities generated by clirr, what's the go?
> > > >> Should
> > > >>> we not be making any incompatible API changes without incrementing
> > the
> > > >>> major version number? In that case I guess we need to revert that
> > > changed
> > > >>> the int to long for 2.11 but what about all the changes in 3.2
> > > presumably
> > > >>> we don't want to release a 4.0?
> > > >>> Cheers
> > > >>> -1
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Downloaded artifacts from staging repos.
> > > >>> Signatures are good.
> > > >>> Checksums are good.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Source zips does not match tag:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> $ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/
> > > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-framework:
> > > >>> test-output
> > > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-recipes:
> > > >> test-output
> > > >>> Only in .: .git
> > > >>> Only in .: .gitignore
> > > >>>
> > > >>> $ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/
> > > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-examples: bin
> > > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework:
> bin
> > > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework:
> > > >> test-output
> > > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes: bin
> > > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes:
> > > >> test-output
> > > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-test: bin
> > > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery:
> > bin
> > > >>> Only in
> > > /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery-server:
> > > >>> bin
> > > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-rpc: bin
> > > >>> Only in .: .git
> > > >>> Only in .: .gitignore
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I think the .git and .gitignore difference is expected, but I don't
> > > think
> > > >>> we should have bin or test-output directories in our source
> releases.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Running mvn package I get a lot of warnings on 3.2 from the clirr
> > > plugin,
> > > >>> too many to list here individually. I get some in 2.11 as well, but
> > > much
> > > >>> fewer.
> > > >>> Changing from Pathable to ErrorListenerPathable is fine for
> > > >> compatibility,
> > > >>> I think. Changing from int to long is not.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Mike
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <
> > randgalt@apache.org
> > > >
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Signatures on both files match
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> +1 Binding
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 3:18 AM, Cameron McKenzie
> > > >>>> <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >>>>> Hello,
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> This is a combined vote to release Apache Curator versions 2.11.0
> > and
> > > >>>> 3.2.0
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> *** Please download, test and vote within approx. 72 hours
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag) and binaries are
> > > >>>>> provided for convenience.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Link to release notes:
> > > >>>>> 2.1.11 - *
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
> > > >>>>> <
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
> > > >>>>> *
> > > >>>>> 3.2.0 - *
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
> > > >>>>> <
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
> > > >>>>> *
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Staging repos:
> > > >>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/2.11.0/
> > > >>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/3.2.0/
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Binary artifacts:
> > > >>>>> 2.11.0 - *
> > > >>>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
> > > >>>>> <
> > > >>>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
> > > >>>>> *
> > > >>>>> 3.2.0 - https://repository.
> > > >>>>> apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1034
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> The tags to be voted upon:
> > > >>>>> 2.11.0 - *
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
> > > >>>>> <
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
> > > >>>>> *
> > > >>>>> 3.2.0 - *
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
> > > >>>>> <
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
> > > >>>>> *
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Curator's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the
> release:
> > > >>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/curator/KEYS
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> [ ] +1 approve
> > > >>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
> > > >>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> > > >>>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Curator version 2.11.0 and 3.2.0
Posted by Mike Drob <ma...@cloudera.com>.
Yea, as long as you doc it somewhere, it shouldn't be a blocker.
On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> That's fine with me. You OK with it Mike?
> On 19 Jun 2016 1:21 AM, "Jordan Zimmerman" <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Can we solve this at a different time? People are waiting on this release
> > and the version number will not affect their applications one bit.
> >
> > -Jordan
> >
> > > On Jun 18, 2016, at 4:31 AM, Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I can see both points of view. In an ideal world we would use the
> proper
> > > definition of semantic versioning, but pragmatically, I think that it
> is
> > > going to be difficult to maintain with 2 concurrent sets of releases.
> > So, I
> > > think that we should just tried with the version numbers suggested.
> > > Thoughts?
> > > On 18 Jun 2016 2:09 PM, "Jordan Zimmerman" <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I’m very much against bumping the major version number. We’re using
> the
> > >> major version number to indicate compatibility with ZooKeeper.
> > >> Historically, the middle number has represented API compatibility for
> > >> Curator. There’s no reason to change now. We can revisit in the
> future.
> > >>
> > >> -Jordan
> > >>
> > >>> On Jun 17, 2016, at 11:04 PM, Cameron McKenzie <
> mckenzie.cam@gmail.com
> > >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks Mike, I will rebuild and get rid of the bin and test
> > directories.
> > >> In
> > >>> regards to the incompatibilities generated by clirr, what's the go?
> > >> Should
> > >>> we not be making any incompatible API changes without incrementing
> the
> > >>> major version number? In that case I guess we need to revert that
> > changed
> > >>> the int to long for 2.11 but what about all the changes in 3.2
> > presumably
> > >>> we don't want to release a 4.0?
> > >>> Cheers
> > >>> -1
> > >>>
> > >>> Downloaded artifacts from staging repos.
> > >>> Signatures are good.
> > >>> Checksums are good.
> > >>>
> > >>> Source zips does not match tag:
> > >>>
> > >>> $ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/
> > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-framework:
> > >>> test-output
> > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-recipes:
> > >> test-output
> > >>> Only in .: .git
> > >>> Only in .: .gitignore
> > >>>
> > >>> $ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/
> > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-examples: bin
> > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework: bin
> > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework:
> > >> test-output
> > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes: bin
> > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes:
> > >> test-output
> > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-test: bin
> > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery:
> bin
> > >>> Only in
> > /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery-server:
> > >>> bin
> > >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-rpc: bin
> > >>> Only in .: .git
> > >>> Only in .: .gitignore
> > >>>
> > >>> I think the .git and .gitignore difference is expected, but I don't
> > think
> > >>> we should have bin or test-output directories in our source releases.
> > >>>
> > >>> Running mvn package I get a lot of warnings on 3.2 from the clirr
> > plugin,
> > >>> too many to list here individually. I get some in 2.11 as well, but
> > much
> > >>> fewer.
> > >>> Changing from Pathable to ErrorListenerPathable is fine for
> > >> compatibility,
> > >>> I think. Changing from int to long is not.
> > >>>
> > >>> Mike
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <
> randgalt@apache.org
> > >
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Signatures on both files match
> > >>>>
> > >>>> +1 Binding
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 3:18 AM, Cameron McKenzie
> > >>>> <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >>>>> Hello,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> This is a combined vote to release Apache Curator versions 2.11.0
> and
> > >>>> 3.2.0
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> *** Please download, test and vote within approx. 72 hours
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag) and binaries are
> > >>>>> provided for convenience.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Link to release notes:
> > >>>>> 2.1.11 - *
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
> > >>>>> <
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
> > >>>>> *
> > >>>>> 3.2.0 - *
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
> > >>>>> <
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
> > >>>>> *
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Staging repos:
> > >>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/2.11.0/
> > >>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/3.2.0/
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Binary artifacts:
> > >>>>> 2.11.0 - *
> > >>>>
> > >>
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
> > >>>>> <
> > >>>>
> > >>
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
> > >>>>> *
> > >>>>> 3.2.0 - https://repository.
> > >>>>> apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1034
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The tags to be voted upon:
> > >>>>> 2.11.0 - *
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
> > >>>>> <
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
> > >>>>> *
> > >>>>> 3.2.0 - *
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
> > >>>>> <
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
> > >>>>> *
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Curator's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > >>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/curator/KEYS
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> [ ] +1 approve
> > >>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
> > >>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> > >>>>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Curator version 2.11.0 and 3.2.0
Posted by Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>.
That's fine with me. You OK with it Mike?
On 19 Jun 2016 1:21 AM, "Jordan Zimmerman" <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>
wrote:
> Can we solve this at a different time? People are waiting on this release
> and the version number will not affect their applications one bit.
>
> -Jordan
>
> > On Jun 18, 2016, at 4:31 AM, Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I can see both points of view. In an ideal world we would use the proper
> > definition of semantic versioning, but pragmatically, I think that it is
> > going to be difficult to maintain with 2 concurrent sets of releases.
> So, I
> > think that we should just tried with the version numbers suggested.
> > Thoughts?
> > On 18 Jun 2016 2:09 PM, "Jordan Zimmerman" <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I’m very much against bumping the major version number. We’re using the
> >> major version number to indicate compatibility with ZooKeeper.
> >> Historically, the middle number has represented API compatibility for
> >> Curator. There’s no reason to change now. We can revisit in the future.
> >>
> >> -Jordan
> >>
> >>> On Jun 17, 2016, at 11:04 PM, Cameron McKenzie <mckenzie.cam@gmail.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Thanks Mike, I will rebuild and get rid of the bin and test
> directories.
> >> In
> >>> regards to the incompatibilities generated by clirr, what's the go?
> >> Should
> >>> we not be making any incompatible API changes without incrementing the
> >>> major version number? In that case I guess we need to revert that
> changed
> >>> the int to long for 2.11 but what about all the changes in 3.2
> presumably
> >>> we don't want to release a 4.0?
> >>> Cheers
> >>> -1
> >>>
> >>> Downloaded artifacts from staging repos.
> >>> Signatures are good.
> >>> Checksums are good.
> >>>
> >>> Source zips does not match tag:
> >>>
> >>> $ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/
> >>> Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-framework:
> >>> test-output
> >>> Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-recipes:
> >> test-output
> >>> Only in .: .git
> >>> Only in .: .gitignore
> >>>
> >>> $ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/
> >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-examples: bin
> >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework: bin
> >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework:
> >> test-output
> >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes: bin
> >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes:
> >> test-output
> >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-test: bin
> >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery: bin
> >>> Only in
> /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery-server:
> >>> bin
> >>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-rpc: bin
> >>> Only in .: .git
> >>> Only in .: .gitignore
> >>>
> >>> I think the .git and .gitignore difference is expected, but I don't
> think
> >>> we should have bin or test-output directories in our source releases.
> >>>
> >>> Running mvn package I get a lot of warnings on 3.2 from the clirr
> plugin,
> >>> too many to list here individually. I get some in 2.11 as well, but
> much
> >>> fewer.
> >>> Changing from Pathable to ErrorListenerPathable is fine for
> >> compatibility,
> >>> I think. Changing from int to long is not.
> >>>
> >>> Mike
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <randgalt@apache.org
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Signatures on both files match
> >>>>
> >>>> +1 Binding
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 3:18 AM, Cameron McKenzie
> >>>> <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is a combined vote to release Apache Curator versions 2.11.0 and
> >>>> 3.2.0
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *** Please download, test and vote within approx. 72 hours
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag) and binaries are
> >>>>> provided for convenience.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Link to release notes:
> >>>>> 2.1.11 - *
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
> >>>>> <
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
> >>>>> *
> >>>>> 3.2.0 - *
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
> >>>>> <
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
> >>>>> *
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Staging repos:
> >>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/2.11.0/
> >>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/3.2.0/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Binary artifacts:
> >>>>> 2.11.0 - *
> >>>>
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
> >>>>> <
> >>>>
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
> >>>>> *
> >>>>> 3.2.0 - https://repository.
> >>>>> apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1034
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The tags to be voted upon:
> >>>>> 2.11.0 - *
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
> >>>>> <
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
> >>>>> *
> >>>>> 3.2.0 - *
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
> >>>>> <
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
> >>>>> *
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Curator's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> >>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/curator/KEYS
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [ ] +1 approve
> >>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
> >>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Curator version 2.11.0 and 3.2.0
Posted by Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>.
Can we solve this at a different time? People are waiting on this release and the version number will not affect their applications one bit.
-Jordan
> On Jun 18, 2016, at 4:31 AM, Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I can see both points of view. In an ideal world we would use the proper
> definition of semantic versioning, but pragmatically, I think that it is
> going to be difficult to maintain with 2 concurrent sets of releases. So, I
> think that we should just tried with the version numbers suggested.
> Thoughts?
> On 18 Jun 2016 2:09 PM, "Jordan Zimmerman" <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I’m very much against bumping the major version number. We’re using the
>> major version number to indicate compatibility with ZooKeeper.
>> Historically, the middle number has represented API compatibility for
>> Curator. There’s no reason to change now. We can revisit in the future.
>>
>> -Jordan
>>
>>> On Jun 17, 2016, at 11:04 PM, Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks Mike, I will rebuild and get rid of the bin and test directories.
>> In
>>> regards to the incompatibilities generated by clirr, what's the go?
>> Should
>>> we not be making any incompatible API changes without incrementing the
>>> major version number? In that case I guess we need to revert that changed
>>> the int to long for 2.11 but what about all the changes in 3.2 presumably
>>> we don't want to release a 4.0?
>>> Cheers
>>> -1
>>>
>>> Downloaded artifacts from staging repos.
>>> Signatures are good.
>>> Checksums are good.
>>>
>>> Source zips does not match tag:
>>>
>>> $ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/
>>> Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-framework:
>>> test-output
>>> Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-recipes:
>> test-output
>>> Only in .: .git
>>> Only in .: .gitignore
>>>
>>> $ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/
>>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-examples: bin
>>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework: bin
>>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework:
>> test-output
>>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes: bin
>>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes:
>> test-output
>>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-test: bin
>>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery: bin
>>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery-server:
>>> bin
>>> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-rpc: bin
>>> Only in .: .git
>>> Only in .: .gitignore
>>>
>>> I think the .git and .gitignore difference is expected, but I don't think
>>> we should have bin or test-output directories in our source releases.
>>>
>>> Running mvn package I get a lot of warnings on 3.2 from the clirr plugin,
>>> too many to list here individually. I get some in 2.11 as well, but much
>>> fewer.
>>> Changing from Pathable to ErrorListenerPathable is fine for
>> compatibility,
>>> I think. Changing from int to long is not.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <ra...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Signatures on both files match
>>>>
>>>> +1 Binding
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 3:18 AM, Cameron McKenzie
>>>> <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a combined vote to release Apache Curator versions 2.11.0 and
>>>> 3.2.0
>>>>>
>>>>> *** Please download, test and vote within approx. 72 hours
>>>>>
>>>>> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag) and binaries are
>>>>> provided for convenience.
>>>>>
>>>>> Link to release notes:
>>>>> 2.1.11 - *
>>>>
>>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
>>>>> <
>>>>
>>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
>>>>> *
>>>>> 3.2.0 - *
>>>>
>>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
>>>>> <
>>>>
>>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>> Staging repos:
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/2.11.0/
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/3.2.0/
>>>>>
>>>>> Binary artifacts:
>>>>> 2.11.0 - *
>>>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
>>>>> <
>>>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
>>>>> *
>>>>> 3.2.0 - https://repository.
>>>>> apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1034
>>>>>
>>>>> The tags to be voted upon:
>>>>> 2.11.0 - *
>>>>
>>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
>>>>> <
>>>>
>>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
>>>>> *
>>>>> 3.2.0 - *
>>>>
>>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
>>>>> <
>>>>
>>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>> Curator's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/curator/KEYS
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Curator version 2.11.0 and 3.2.0
Posted by Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>.
I can see both points of view. In an ideal world we would use the proper
definition of semantic versioning, but pragmatically, I think that it is
going to be difficult to maintain with 2 concurrent sets of releases. So, I
think that we should just tried with the version numbers suggested.
Thoughts?
On 18 Jun 2016 2:09 PM, "Jordan Zimmerman" <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>
wrote:
> I’m very much against bumping the major version number. We’re using the
> major version number to indicate compatibility with ZooKeeper.
> Historically, the middle number has represented API compatibility for
> Curator. There’s no reason to change now. We can revisit in the future.
>
> -Jordan
>
> > On Jun 17, 2016, at 11:04 PM, Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Mike, I will rebuild and get rid of the bin and test directories.
> In
> > regards to the incompatibilities generated by clirr, what's the go?
> Should
> > we not be making any incompatible API changes without incrementing the
> > major version number? In that case I guess we need to revert that changed
> > the int to long for 2.11 but what about all the changes in 3.2 presumably
> > we don't want to release a 4.0?
> > Cheers
> > -1
> >
> > Downloaded artifacts from staging repos.
> > Signatures are good.
> > Checksums are good.
> >
> > Source zips does not match tag:
> >
> > $ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/
> > Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-framework:
> > test-output
> > Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-recipes:
> test-output
> > Only in .: .git
> > Only in .: .gitignore
> >
> > $ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/
> > Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-examples: bin
> > Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework: bin
> > Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework:
> test-output
> > Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes: bin
> > Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes:
> test-output
> > Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-test: bin
> > Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery: bin
> > Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery-server:
> > bin
> > Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-rpc: bin
> > Only in .: .git
> > Only in .: .gitignore
> >
> > I think the .git and .gitignore difference is expected, but I don't think
> > we should have bin or test-output directories in our source releases.
> >
> > Running mvn package I get a lot of warnings on 3.2 from the clirr plugin,
> > too many to list here individually. I get some in 2.11 as well, but much
> > fewer.
> > Changing from Pathable to ErrorListenerPathable is fine for
> compatibility,
> > I think. Changing from int to long is not.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <ra...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Signatures on both files match
> >>
> >> +1 Binding
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 3:18 AM, Cameron McKenzie
> >> <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> This is a combined vote to release Apache Curator versions 2.11.0 and
> >> 3.2.0
> >>>
> >>> *** Please download, test and vote within approx. 72 hours
> >>>
> >>> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag) and binaries are
> >>> provided for convenience.
> >>>
> >>> Link to release notes:
> >>> 2.1.11 - *
> >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
> >>> <
> >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
> >>> *
> >>> 3.2.0 - *
> >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
> >>> <
> >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
> >>> *
> >>>
> >>> Staging repos:
> >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/2.11.0/
> >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/3.2.0/
> >>>
> >>> Binary artifacts:
> >>> 2.11.0 - *
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
> >>> <
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
> >>> *
> >>> 3.2.0 - https://repository.
> >>> apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1034
> >>>
> >>> The tags to be voted upon:
> >>> 2.11.0 - *
> >>
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
> >>> <
> >>
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
> >>> *
> >>> 3.2.0 - *
> >>
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
> >>> <
> >>
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
> >>> *
> >>>
> >>> Curator's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> >>> http://www.apache.org/dist/curator/KEYS
> >>>
> >>> [ ] +1 approve
> >>> [ ] +0 no opinion
> >>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Curator version 2.11.0 and 3.2.0
Posted by Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>.
I’m very much against bumping the major version number. We’re using the major version number to indicate compatibility with ZooKeeper. Historically, the middle number has represented API compatibility for Curator. There’s no reason to change now. We can revisit in the future.
-Jordan
> On Jun 17, 2016, at 11:04 PM, Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Mike, I will rebuild and get rid of the bin and test directories. In
> regards to the incompatibilities generated by clirr, what's the go? Should
> we not be making any incompatible API changes without incrementing the
> major version number? In that case I guess we need to revert that changed
> the int to long for 2.11 but what about all the changes in 3.2 presumably
> we don't want to release a 4.0?
> Cheers
> -1
>
> Downloaded artifacts from staging repos.
> Signatures are good.
> Checksums are good.
>
> Source zips does not match tag:
>
> $ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/
> Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-framework:
> test-output
> Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-recipes: test-output
> Only in .: .git
> Only in .: .gitignore
>
> $ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/
> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-examples: bin
> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework: bin
> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework: test-output
> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes: bin
> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes: test-output
> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-test: bin
> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery: bin
> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery-server:
> bin
> Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-rpc: bin
> Only in .: .git
> Only in .: .gitignore
>
> I think the .git and .gitignore difference is expected, but I don't think
> we should have bin or test-output directories in our source releases.
>
> Running mvn package I get a lot of warnings on 3.2 from the clirr plugin,
> too many to list here individually. I get some in 2.11 as well, but much
> fewer.
> Changing from Pathable to ErrorListenerPathable is fine for compatibility,
> I think. Changing from int to long is not.
>
> Mike
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <ra...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Signatures on both files match
>>
>> +1 Binding
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 3:18 AM, Cameron McKenzie
>> <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> This is a combined vote to release Apache Curator versions 2.11.0 and
>> 3.2.0
>>>
>>> *** Please download, test and vote within approx. 72 hours
>>>
>>> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag) and binaries are
>>> provided for convenience.
>>>
>>> Link to release notes:
>>> 2.1.11 - *
>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
>>> <
>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
>>> *
>>> 3.2.0 - *
>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
>>> <
>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
>>> *
>>>
>>> Staging repos:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/2.11.0/
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/3.2.0/
>>>
>>> Binary artifacts:
>>> 2.11.0 - *
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
>>> <
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
>>> *
>>> 3.2.0 - https://repository.
>>> apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1034
>>>
>>> The tags to be voted upon:
>>> 2.11.0 - *
>>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
>>> <
>>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
>>> *
>>> 3.2.0 - *
>>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
>>> <
>>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
>>> *
>>>
>>> Curator's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/curator/KEYS
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Curator version 2.11.0 and 3.2.0
Posted by Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Mike, I will rebuild and get rid of the bin and test directories. In
regards to the incompatibilities generated by clirr, what's the go? Should
we not be making any incompatible API changes without incrementing the
major version number? In that case I guess we need to revert that changed
the int to long for 2.11 but what about all the changes in 3.2 presumably
we don't want to release a 4.0?
Cheers
-1
Downloaded artifacts from staging repos.
Signatures are good.
Checksums are good.
Source zips does not match tag:
$ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/
Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-framework:
test-output
Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-recipes: test-output
Only in .: .git
Only in .: .gitignore
$ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-examples: bin
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework: bin
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework: test-output
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes: bin
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes: test-output
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-test: bin
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery: bin
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery-server:
bin
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-rpc: bin
Only in .: .git
Only in .: .gitignore
I think the .git and .gitignore difference is expected, but I don't think
we should have bin or test-output directories in our source releases.
Running mvn package I get a lot of warnings on 3.2 from the clirr plugin,
too many to list here individually. I get some in 2.11 as well, but much
fewer.
Changing from Pathable to ErrorListenerPathable is fine for compatibility,
I think. Changing from int to long is not.
Mike
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <ra...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Signatures on both files match
>
> +1 Binding
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 3:18 AM, Cameron McKenzie
> <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This is a combined vote to release Apache Curator versions 2.11.0 and
> 3.2.0
> >
> > *** Please download, test and vote within approx. 72 hours
> >
> > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag) and binaries are
> > provided for convenience.
> >
> > Link to release notes:
> > 2.1.11 - *
>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
> > <
>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
> >*
> > 3.2.0 - *
>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
> > <
>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
> >*
> >
> > Staging repos:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/2.11.0/
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/3.2.0/
> >
> > Binary artifacts:
> > 2.11.0 - *
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
> > <
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
> >*
> > 3.2.0 - https://repository.
> > apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1034
> >
> > The tags to be voted upon:
> > 2.11.0 - *
>
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
> > <
>
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
> >*
> > 3.2.0 - *
>
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
> > <
>
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
> >*
> >
> > Curator's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > http://www.apache.org/dist/curator/KEYS
> >
> > [ ] +1 approve
> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Curator version 2.11.0 and 3.2.0
Posted by Mike Drob <ma...@cloudera.com>.
-1
Downloaded artifacts from staging repos.
Signatures are good.
Checksums are good.
Source zips does not match tag:
$ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/
Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-framework:
test-output
Only in /tmp/curator/2.11/apache-curator-2.11.0/curator-recipes: test-output
Only in .: .git
Only in .: .gitignore
$ diff --recursive . /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-examples: bin
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework: bin
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-framework: test-output
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes: bin
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-recipes: test-output
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-test: bin
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery: bin
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-discovery-server:
bin
Only in /tmp/curator/3.2/apache-curator-3.2.0/curator-x-rpc: bin
Only in .: .git
Only in .: .gitignore
I think the .git and .gitignore difference is expected, but I don't think
we should have bin or test-output directories in our source releases.
Running mvn package I get a lot of warnings on 3.2 from the clirr plugin,
too many to list here individually. I get some in 2.11 as well, but much
fewer.
Changing from Pathable to ErrorListenerPathable is fine for compatibility,
I think. Changing from int to long is not.
Mike
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <ra...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Signatures on both files match
>
> +1 Binding
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 3:18 AM, Cameron McKenzie
> <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This is a combined vote to release Apache Curator versions 2.11.0 and
> 3.2.0
> >
> > *** Please download, test and vote within approx. 72 hours
> >
> > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag) and binaries are
> > provided for convenience.
> >
> > Link to release notes:
> > 2.1.11 - *
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
> >*
> > 3.2.0 - *
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
> > <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
> >*
> >
> > Staging repos:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/2.11.0/
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/3.2.0/
> >
> > Binary artifacts:
> > 2.11.0 - *
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
> > <
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
> >*
> > 3.2.0 - https://repository.
> > apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1034
> >
> > The tags to be voted upon:
> > 2.11.0 - *
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
> > <
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
> >*
> > 3.2.0 - *
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
> > <
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
> >*
> >
> > Curator's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > http://www.apache.org/dist/curator/KEYS
> >
> > [ ] +1 approve
> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Curator version 2.11.0 and 3.2.0
Posted by Jordan Zimmerman <ra...@apache.org>.
Signatures on both files match
+1 Binding
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 3:18 AM, Cameron McKenzie
<ca...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This is a combined vote to release Apache Curator versions 2.11.0 and 3.2.0
>
> *** Please download, test and vote within approx. 72 hours
>
> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag) and binaries are
> provided for convenience.
>
> Link to release notes:
> 2.1.11 - *https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335828>*
> 3.2.0 - *https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12335829>*
>
> Staging repos:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/2.11.0/
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/3.2.0/
>
> Binary artifacts:
> 2.11.0 - *https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/
> <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1033/>*
> 3.2.0 - https://repository.
> apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1034
>
> The tags to be voted upon:
> 2.11.0 - *https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7
> <https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=9ac3980e0e7f455a69f44a3b26154f826d8459b7>*
> 3.2.0 - *https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc
> <https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=5ac624bb9d188f8db87d8de1ae0c256ba1515ddc>*
>
> Curator's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> http://www.apache.org/dist/curator/KEYS
>
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)