You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openwhisk.apache.org by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> on 2018/06/20 10:47:25 UTC
[Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Hi OpenWhiskers,
We are currently working on the first release of OpenWhisk. The version name is called incubator-1.0.0, and the subversion is rc2(rc1 as a pilot, has been existing for while).
There will be 13 openwhisk projected to be released.
The PR in OpenWhisk release repo contains all the information of the hash values of all the repositories: https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/pull/190. The artifacts will be generated, when this PR is merged.
If you have any questions or concerns, please chime in with your comments.
Thank you.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:47 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> ...If you have any questions or concerns, please chime in with your comments...
No questions at this time but I'd like to remind people of the release
voting process for Apache Incubator podlings, roughly:
-The release candidates are prepared and a [VOTE] happens here. At
this point it's good to get votes from all 3 mentors if possible.
-If successful, another [VOTE] happens on general@incubator.a.o, as
the release needs to be approved by an Apache PMC, a podling PMC is
not sufficient.
-If successful, the release is promoted under
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/openwhisk/
The technical quality of initial podling releases is not really
important, what matters at this "training" stage is getting the formal
aspects of the release and release process validated.
Of course, if the release is good from a technical point of view it's
even better ;-)
> ...There will be 13 openwhisk projected to be released...
With my incubation mentor hat on I strongly advise starting with just
one module, to validate the process first.
-Bertrand
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
+1
Vincent
What do you mean by "There will be 13 openwhisk projected to be
released."
I think you mean repos/subcomponents
Dave,
This is source only release, which is what's required by ASF, literaly
taking the source control repository and doing a tar with it's content
excluding any files that should not be part of the release src tgz.
About git tags, I think the goal is after release is done and final content
released, would be to go pack for each repo and create a tag to mark the
git repo with a more friendly human readable string like you mentioned
"incubator-${version}`.
This also gives the benefit to use github "compare" feature [1] (i.e.
http://github.com/<USER>/<REPO>/compare/[<START>...]<END></i>)
[1] https://blog.github.com/2010-03-01-introducing-github-compare-view/
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 8:27 AM David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote on 06/20/2018 06:47:25 AM:
> >
> > We are currently working on the first release of OpenWhisk. The
> > version name is called incubator-1.0.0, and the subversion is
> > rc2(rc1 as a pilot, has been existing for while).
> >
> > There will be 13 openwhisk projected to be released.
> > The PR in OpenWhisk release repo contains all the information of the
> > hash values of all the repositories: https://
> > urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
> >
>
> u=https-3A__github.com_apache_incubator-2Dopenwhisk-2Drelease_pull_190&d=DwIFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-
>
> > siA1ZOg&r=Fe4FicGBU_20P2yihxV-
> > apaNSFb6BSj6AlkptSF2gMk&m=fyO8VqoMt6Yv9Lv7Yf5eUOQgH74eoKPi_3p_WU-
> > hZEw&s=mONyOT6wjdWl4JJQg685CHlwAU469EtEj_c49PytCnI&e=. The artifacts
> > will be generated, when this PR is merged.
> >
> > If you have any questions or concerns, please chime in with your
> comments.
> >
>
> This is great!!
>
> I had a procedural question, is part of the release process changing the
> various "latest" tags for docker images (openwhisk/invoker, etc) to
> "incubator-1.0.0" in the ansible/yaml files that specify docker images to
> pull, or is that not needed because this is a source only release and there
> will not be matching docker images?
>
> --dave
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Michele Sciabarra <op...@sciabarra.com>.
+1 for 0.9.0-incubating
time to write a book on it :)
--
Michele Sciabarra
openwhisk@sciabarra.com
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018, at 8:24 PM, James Thomas wrote:
> +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
>
> Good work on this everyone. Time to get the 🍾🍾🍾 ready....
>
> On 21 June 2018 at 17:35, Priti Desai <pd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > +1 for the release, its been a lot of hard work from the team, great job
> > Matt, Vincent, and Daisy!
> >
> > Cheers
> > Priti
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> James Thomas
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com>.
+1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
Good work on this everyone. Time to get the 🍾🍾🍾 ready....
On 21 June 2018 at 17:35, Priti Desai <pd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> +1 for the release, its been a lot of hard work from the team, great job
> Matt, Vincent, and Daisy!
>
> Cheers
> Priti
>
>
--
Regards,
James Thomas
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com>.
"Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote on 06/21/2018 10:14:46 PM:
>
> Except the issues we have above, does anyone have any other concerns
> we need to take into account for the 0.9.0 release? If so, this is
> the chance to raise it; if not, we shall proceed the, after we made
> the minor fixes to the above listed issues.
>
I'd suggest adding issue 195 [1] to the list as well, especially if we are
going to be releasing multiple source tarballs.
When I downloaded a couple of the rcs yesterday to check them, the fact
that they all expanded directly into the current directory directly was
surprising.
--dave
[1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/issues/195
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Priti Desai <pd...@us.ibm.com>.
I vote +1
Checklist for reference:
- [X] Download links are valid.
- [X] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
- [X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
release.
- [X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
- [X] All files have license headers if necessary. (Scanning files
succeeded with "All checks passed.")
Cheers
Priti
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk
module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Thank everybody for the votes.
I will consolidate the result and forward it to the IPMC at general@incubator.apache.org, for further approval.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----"Priti Desai" <pd...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: "Priti Desai" <pd...@us.ibm.com>
Date: 07/10/2018 03:30PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[O] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[X] All files have license headers if necessary.
[O] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Cheers
Priti
From: Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 07/10/2018 08:34 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2:
main OpenWhisk module
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[X] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[X] All files have license headers if necessary.
[X] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:55 AM, Ying Chun Guo <gu...@cn.ibm.com>
wrote:
> I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [X] Download links are valid.
> [O] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
release.
> [X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [X] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [X] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
>
> Best regards
> Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
>
>
> -----"Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> From: "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com>
> Date: 07/04/2018 02:55AM
> Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main
> OpenWhisk module
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk
> 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module.
>
> We have resolved all the issues regarding the dependency's license,
gradle
> wrapper, some documentation issues, etc, based on we discussed during
last
> voting mail thread for rc1.
>
> This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one
> module within this release. The artifact was built from the following
Git
> commit ID:
> * openwhisk: b1476b9, add until for all ansible retries (#3806)
>
> The source code artifacts can be found at:
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
>
> The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
>
> The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
>
> The signature of this artifact can be found via:
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
>
> KEYS file is available here:
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
>
> The documentation can be found via:
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/doc/INSTALL.md
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk
0.9.0-incubating
> rc2.
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> [ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ ] Download links are valid.
> [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
release.
> [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United
> States
>
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main
OpenWhisk module
Posted by Dragos Dascalita Haut <dd...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[X] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[X] All files have license headers if necessary.
[X] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
dragos
________________________________
From: Priti Desai <pd...@us.ibm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2018 12:30:26 PM
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[O] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[X] All files have license headers if necessary.
[O] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Cheers
Priti
From: Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 07/10/2018 08:34 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2:
main OpenWhisk module
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[X] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[X] All files have license headers if necessary.
[X] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:55 AM, Ying Chun Guo <gu...@cn.ibm.com>
wrote:
> I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [X] Download links are valid.
> [O] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
release.
> [X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [X] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [X] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
>
> Best regards
> Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
>
>
> -----"Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> From: "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com>
> Date: 07/04/2018 02:55AM
> Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main
> OpenWhisk module
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk
> 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module.
>
> We have resolved all the issues regarding the dependency's license,
gradle
> wrapper, some documentation issues, etc, based on we discussed during
last
> voting mail thread for rc1.
>
> This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one
> module within this release. The artifact was built from the following
Git
> commit ID:
> * openwhisk: b1476b9, add until for all ansible retries (#3806)
>
> The source code artifacts can be found at:
>
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fincubator%2Fopenwhisk%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cddascal%40adobe.com%7C08b5dd94b1a24e6aa96508d5e69b9c9f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636668478378653959&sdata=%2BElcewu5j3%2BrIG0au4YHbfNz50WRIV%2FaFL%2BUTZDYbKY%3D&reserved=0
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
>
> The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fincubator%2Fopenwhisk%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cddascal%40adobe.com%7C08b5dd94b1a24e6aa96508d5e69b9c9f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636668478378653959&sdata=%2BElcewu5j3%2BrIG0au4YHbfNz50WRIV%2FaFL%2BUTZDYbKY%3D&reserved=0
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
>
> The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fincubator%2Fopenwhisk%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cddascal%40adobe.com%7C08b5dd94b1a24e6aa96508d5e69b9c9f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636668478378653959&sdata=%2BElcewu5j3%2BrIG0au4YHbfNz50WRIV%2FaFL%2BUTZDYbKY%3D&reserved=0
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
>
> The signature of this artifact can be found via:
>
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fincubator%2Fopenwhisk%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cddascal%40adobe.com%7C08b5dd94b1a24e6aa96508d5e69b9c9f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636668478378653959&sdata=%2BElcewu5j3%2BrIG0au4YHbfNz50WRIV%2FaFL%2BUTZDYbKY%3D&reserved=0
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
>
> KEYS file is available here:
>
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fincubator%2Fopenwhisk%2FKEYS&data=02%7C01%7Cddascal%40adobe.com%7C08b5dd94b1a24e6aa96508d5e69b9c9f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636668478378653959&sdata=ApaS%2BJhXmS1ZnkMeoXVYPIWKF3BHkSQ9KR%2FEThL6fEc%3D&reserved=0
>
> The documentation can be found via:
>
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fincubator%2Fopenwhisk%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cddascal%40adobe.com%7C08b5dd94b1a24e6aa96508d5e69b9c9f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636668478378653959&sdata=%2BElcewu5j3%2BrIG0au4YHbfNz50WRIV%2FaFL%2BUTZDYbKY%3D&reserved=0
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/doc/INSTALL.md
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk
0.9.0-incubating
> rc2.
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> [ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ ] Download links are valid.
> [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
release.
> [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United
> States
>
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk
module
Posted by Priti Desai <pd...@us.ibm.com>.
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[O] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[X] All files have license headers if necessary.
[O] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Cheers
Priti
From: Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 07/10/2018 08:34 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2:
main OpenWhisk module
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[X] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[X] All files have license headers if necessary.
[X] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:55 AM, Ying Chun Guo <gu...@cn.ibm.com>
wrote:
> I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [X] Download links are valid.
> [O] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
release.
> [X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [X] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [X] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
>
> Best regards
> Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
>
>
> -----"Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> From: "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com>
> Date: 07/04/2018 02:55AM
> Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main
> OpenWhisk module
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk
> 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module.
>
> We have resolved all the issues regarding the dependency's license,
gradle
> wrapper, some documentation issues, etc, based on we discussed during
last
> voting mail thread for rc1.
>
> This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one
> module within this release. The artifact was built from the following
Git
> commit ID:
> * openwhisk: b1476b9, add until for all ansible retries (#3806)
>
> The source code artifacts can be found at:
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
>
> The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
>
> The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
>
> The signature of this artifact can be found via:
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
>
> KEYS file is available here:
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
>
> The documentation can be found via:
>
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/doc/INSTALL.md
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk
0.9.0-incubating
> rc2.
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> [ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ ] Download links are valid.
> [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
release.
> [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United
> States
>
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Priti Desai <pd...@us.ibm.com>.
+1 for the release, its been a lot of hard work from the team, great job
Matt, Vincent, and Daisy!
Cheers
Priti
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>.
Thank Carlos for your assessment based upon Bertrand's detailed review.
>> Yeah the renaming of the scala packages, should not be a show stopper
but
>> we should open an issue in the release repo to track.
>> Also needs some coordination for own modules that depends on it and
>> downstreams.
agree. can this be an issue we open now and address
>> We can release 0.9.0, and after release we can published to maven and
repos
>> and downtreams that depend on it we can pin in gradle to pull 0.9.0
until
>> the package get's rename to org.apache.openwhisk.*
agree (here and on an earlier reply), can schedule time for that in the
next 1-2 months looking at known priorities.
>> I agree with Bertrand about license check,
>> There should be a simple way that anyone outside the openwhisk
community
>> can download the tgz, extract and follow simple steps to run the
license
>> scanner against the content of the tgz
We have good independent documentation on our release repo. for
running/configuring RAT and Scancode, perhaps we need to surface it better
and perhaps specifically document specific steps against the .tgz
artifacts?
and help me, what changes that have so far been identified would warrant a
new rc? .scala file name changes?
-mr
ps. like the implied familiarity/cool factor of using 2 letters to
signoff, but still makes me feel maybe too anonymous...
From: Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 06/21/2018 09:45 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Thanks Betrand,
You saved me time today :yay: !
Yeah the renaming of the scala packages, should not be a show stopper but
we should open an issue in the release repo to track.
Also needs some coordination for own modules that depends on it and
downstreams.
We can release 0.9.0, and after release we can published to maven and
repos
and downtreams that depend on it we can pin in gradle to pull 0.9.0 until
the package get's rename to org.apache.openwhisk.*
I agree with Bertrand about license check,
There should be a simple way that anyone outside the openwhisk community
can download the tgz, extract and follow simple steps to run the license
scanner against the content of the tgz
-cs
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 10:33 AM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Bertrand for the suggestion to modularize the release - I do
think
> that makes a lot of sense as well.
>
> The way we're vectoring is for the runtimes to be independent and can
have
> their own lifecycle.
> Similarly the CLI and related tooling.
> In the long run this will make a lot of sense.
>
>
> -r
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
> bdelacretaz@apache.org
> > wrote:
>
> > Hi Vincent,
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 2:53 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > ...Does it mean we can try to release one of the 13 modules, like
> > openwhisk, or openwhisk-cli, or consolidate
> > > all the 13 projects into one for release?...
> >
> > The former, I would say?
> >
> > It's probably more convenient for your users and w.r.t release cycles?
> >
> > For Apache Sling, as an example which is extremely modular, we do lots
> > of individual module releases all the time, and about once a year do a
> > "big bang" release that includes all core module.
> >
> > A model like that might be good for OpenWhisk, but as this stage as
> > mentioned for a first "training release" it's probably best to stick
> > to one typical module to refine the process.
> >
> > ...
> > > * The key can be accessed at
https://dist.apache.org/repos/
> > dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS. You missed "dev/" in your link...
> >
> > Ah ok, sorry! Got it now.
> >
> > > ...* So far the header is not verified with RAT. We have a unitiy
repo
> > call
> > > openwhisk-utility(
https://github.com/apache/incubator-
> > openwhisk-utilities) to scan all the code. RAT has issues,
> > > since I have never got it running correctly in openwhisk. The Travis
> > build uses this openwhisk-utility to verify the
> > > headers for every incoming commit....
> >
> > Ok. The "how to I run the utility to verify the license headers"
> > question should be answerable with a URL, maybe the docs of that
> > utility?
> > People will need to be able to run it standalone to do their own
> > verifications.
> >
> > > * RSA private key should have some instructions. We will work on
it...
> >
> > Great
> >
> > > * We do not release binary this time...
> >
> > Yes - I was checking for binaries that might have been leftover, saw
> > none and that's good!
> >
> > > * We will look at the .scala code files...
> >
> > Ok. If the package name change is too disruptive it can be postponed
> > for later during incubation, but that needs to be tracked.
> >
> > > * For README, let me make the build instruction more clear...
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > I suppose this means this vote is canceled until you have a new
> > release candidate?
> >
> > -Bertrand
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Betrand,
You saved me time today :yay: !
Yeah the renaming of the scala packages, should not be a show stopper but
we should open an issue in the release repo to track.
Also needs some coordination for own modules that depends on it and
downstreams.
We can release 0.9.0, and after release we can published to maven and repos
and downtreams that depend on it we can pin in gradle to pull 0.9.0 until
the package get's rename to org.apache.openwhisk.*
I agree with Bertrand about license check,
There should be a simple way that anyone outside the openwhisk community
can download the tgz, extract and follow simple steps to run the license
scanner against the content of the tgz
-cs
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 10:33 AM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Bertrand for the suggestion to modularize the release - I do think
> that makes a lot of sense as well.
>
> The way we're vectoring is for the runtimes to be independent and can have
> their own lifecycle.
> Similarly the CLI and related tooling.
> In the long run this will make a lot of sense.
>
>
> -r
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
> bdelacretaz@apache.org
> > wrote:
>
> > Hi Vincent,
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 2:53 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > ...Does it mean we can try to release one of the 13 modules, like
> > openwhisk, or openwhisk-cli, or consolidate
> > > all the 13 projects into one for release?...
> >
> > The former, I would say?
> >
> > It's probably more convenient for your users and w.r.t release cycles?
> >
> > For Apache Sling, as an example which is extremely modular, we do lots
> > of individual module releases all the time, and about once a year do a
> > "big bang" release that includes all core module.
> >
> > A model like that might be good for OpenWhisk, but as this stage as
> > mentioned for a first "training release" it's probably best to stick
> > to one typical module to refine the process.
> >
> > ...
> > > * The key can be accessed at https://dist.apache.org/repos/
> > dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS. You missed "dev/" in your link...
> >
> > Ah ok, sorry! Got it now.
> >
> > > ...* So far the header is not verified with RAT. We have a unitiy repo
> > call
> > > openwhisk-utility(https://github.com/apache/incubator-
> > openwhisk-utilities) to scan all the code. RAT has issues,
> > > since I have never got it running correctly in openwhisk. The Travis
> > build uses this openwhisk-utility to verify the
> > > headers for every incoming commit....
> >
> > Ok. The "how to I run the utility to verify the license headers"
> > question should be answerable with a URL, maybe the docs of that
> > utility?
> > People will need to be able to run it standalone to do their own
> > verifications.
> >
> > > * RSA private key should have some instructions. We will work on it...
> >
> > Great
> >
> > > * We do not release binary this time...
> >
> > Yes - I was checking for binaries that might have been leftover, saw
> > none and that's good!
> >
> > > * We will look at the .scala code files...
> >
> > Ok. If the package name change is too disruptive it can be postponed
> > for later during incubation, but that needs to be tracked.
> >
> > > * For README, let me make the build instruction more clear...
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > I suppose this means this vote is canceled until you have a new
> > release candidate?
> >
> > -Bertrand
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Bertrand for the suggestion to modularize the release - I do think
that makes a lot of sense as well.
The way we're vectoring is for the runtimes to be independent and can have
their own lifecycle.
Similarly the CLI and related tooling.
In the long run this will make a lot of sense.
-r
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org
> wrote:
> Hi Vincent,
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 2:53 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > ...Does it mean we can try to release one of the 13 modules, like
> openwhisk, or openwhisk-cli, or consolidate
> > all the 13 projects into one for release?...
>
> The former, I would say?
>
> It's probably more convenient for your users and w.r.t release cycles?
>
> For Apache Sling, as an example which is extremely modular, we do lots
> of individual module releases all the time, and about once a year do a
> "big bang" release that includes all core module.
>
> A model like that might be good for OpenWhisk, but as this stage as
> mentioned for a first "training release" it's probably best to stick
> to one typical module to refine the process.
>
> ...
> > * The key can be accessed at https://dist.apache.org/repos/
> dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS. You missed "dev/" in your link...
>
> Ah ok, sorry! Got it now.
>
> > ...* So far the header is not verified with RAT. We have a unitiy repo
> call
> > openwhisk-utility(https://github.com/apache/incubator-
> openwhisk-utilities) to scan all the code. RAT has issues,
> > since I have never got it running correctly in openwhisk. The Travis
> build uses this openwhisk-utility to verify the
> > headers for every incoming commit....
>
> Ok. The "how to I run the utility to verify the license headers"
> question should be answerable with a URL, maybe the docs of that
> utility?
> People will need to be able to run it standalone to do their own
> verifications.
>
> > * RSA private key should have some instructions. We will work on it...
>
> Great
>
> > * We do not release binary this time...
>
> Yes - I was checking for binaries that might have been leftover, saw
> none and that's good!
>
> > * We will look at the .scala code files...
>
> Ok. If the package name change is too disruptive it can be postponed
> for later during incubation, but that needs to be tracked.
>
> > * For README, let me make the build instruction more clear...
>
> Thanks!
>
> I suppose this means this vote is canceled until you have a new
> release candidate?
>
> -Bertrand
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>.
Hi Bertrand,
As you noted, the release process uses the Apache RAT to scan all the
built TAR files and our own Scancode utility scans files at "build time"
for both PR and release (master or named release) builds.
We have endeavored to document our use of these scanning utilities within
the context of our release process here:
- "License Compliance":
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/blob/master/docs/license_compliance.md
On this page, we describe our usage of both RAT and Scancode as well as
detailing, in great depth, all file inclusions down to every file type we
have across all repos.
In addition (for convenience and to prove thoroughness), we have
identified all known exclusions (all in accordance with Apache policy) by
repo. here:
-
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/blob/master/docs/license_exclusions.md
and you surmised correctly that the Scancode utility usage is documented
where it lives in the incubator-openwhisk-utility repo. here:
- description/install/build/run basics:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-utilities
- full usage:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-utilities/blob/master/scancode/README.md
Fee free to ask any question about licenses and scanning as this has been
my life for the last many months...
Kind regards,
Matt
From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 06/21/2018 08:08 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Hi Vincent,
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 2:53 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> ...Does it mean we can try to release one of the 13 modules, like
openwhisk, or openwhisk-cli, or consolidate
> all the 13 projects into one for release?...
The former, I would say?
It's probably more convenient for your users and w.r.t release cycles?
For Apache Sling, as an example which is extremely modular, we do lots
of individual module releases all the time, and about once a year do a
"big bang" release that includes all core module.
A model like that might be good for OpenWhisk, but as this stage as
mentioned for a first "training release" it's probably best to stick
to one typical module to refine the process.
...
> * The key can be accessed at
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
. You missed "dev/" in your link...
Ah ok, sorry! Got it now.
> ...* So far the header is not verified with RAT. We have a unitiy repo
call
> openwhisk-utility(
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-utilities
) to scan all the code. RAT has issues,
> since I have never got it running correctly in openwhisk. The Travis
build uses this openwhisk-utility to verify the
> headers for every incoming commit....
Ok. The "how to I run the utility to verify the license headers"
question should be answerable with a URL, maybe the docs of that
utility?
People will need to be able to run it standalone to do their own
verifications.
> * RSA private key should have some instructions. We will work on it...
Great
> * We do not release binary this time...
Yes - I was checking for binaries that might have been leftover, saw
none and that's good!
> * We will look at the .scala code files...
Ok. If the package name change is too disruptive it can be postponed
for later during incubation, but that needs to be tracked.
> * For README, let me make the build instruction more clear...
Thanks!
I suppose this means this vote is canceled until you have a new
release candidate?
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>.
> Ok. If the package name change is too disruptive it can be postponed for
later during incubation, but that needs to be tracked.
Indeed this will be disruptive - we should open an issue for the renaming.
It might actually be a good idea to do the release first - which would
allow dependents to pin before making this change which will break even our
own repos.
-r
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>.
+1 for release.
Thanks for all the hard work Vincent and Daisy!
-Matt
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>.
FWIW --- IF we had to pick one repo, the one with the fewest dependences
that could be standalone, as a first release would the go sdk.
Then wskdeploy?
The runtimes and CLI are tricky there after because why self contained, for
the most part, do share common bits with openwhisk repo for the tests.
-r
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 11:27 AM Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hi Bertrand,
>
> I am not sure I understand. Are you saying you believe the Incubator PMC
> will fail us strictly due to having 13 tgz/tar files vs. 1 for a first
> release? Again, it makes no sense to me as it is strictly a choice of
> logical separation (representative of our architectural parts) and
> packaging? Surely you see that can and it is technically not hard to
> explain.
>
> Are you saying they need to be "eased into the concept" because we will
> have 13 (now and more eventually); at some point the board will be exposed
> to multiples.
>
> Plus a single repo. source is not usable by itself and its build dependent
> on the other parts as I mentioned earlier.
>
> Kind regards,
> Matt
>
>
>
>
> From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> Date: 06/21/2018 10:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
>
>
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 5:03 PM Matt Rutkowski <mr...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > ...For now, I am quite happy with releasing all together....
>
> We can try, but as I said I'm not sure if the Incubator PMC will
> accept this for a first release.
>
> Even releasing a single module that's not usable by itself is progress
> w.r.t. the incubation process, where it's the process and legal
> aspects that count, for initial incubating releases, more than the
> technical viability of the product. There's even no obligation to
> "advertise" those releases, considering them training releases is
> fine.
>
> But we can try if that's what the majority of the PPMC wants and if
> the other mentors do not disagree.
>
> > ...BTW, I am more than happy to formalize and represent this position
> (along with the
> > history) to make it clear for others during the review process....
>
> I think it's easy to understand the technical justification for
> releasing multiple modules together - my angle is just the "incubation
> training" one.
>
> -Bertrand
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 6:08 PM Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> ...the main openwhisk README (and supporting) docs include
> instructions on how to build (and tooling that makes it quite easy). We
> can open an issue to better document suggest manual build order....
Sounds good, and if there's a master README that people should be
aware of, I suppose there should be a link to it from all other
READMEs.
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 9:41 AM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...As long as the ASF incubator people are happy with a release that doesn’t have the
> org.apache.openwhisk.* package name, it all seems fine....
> Can we find out by asking first before getting slammed later?..
Initial podling releases with non-apache package names are relatively
common, I don't think that will be a problem as long as there's a
documented plan to fix it before graduation.
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>.
> As long as the ASF incubator people are happy with a release that doesn’t have the org.apache.openwhisk.* package name, it all seems fine.
Can we find out by asking first before getting slammed later?
-r
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Hi Ron,
Thanks for the reply.
Based on the current nature of openwhisk, all the 13 repos/modules are working together. If we only release one module, for example, the client go(go sdk) as suggested, it is a purely client tool, which needs the openwhisk service running, in order to run against. If there is only this client go(go sdk) offered to ASF incubator with no other components, how can they verify the functionality? If they have no idea whether it works correctly, how could this initial go sdk get passed, unless you have a different opinion? This is my concern to merely release one for the first time.
All the modules by far need to run as complete platform. We have openwhisk offering the service, client go, cli and other tools as the client to access them. We need to have different runtimes to make sure openwhisk supports. It is like a FIFA World CUP team, which needs 11 players to field in order to play.
To make life easier, I can consolidate all the modules into tar and come up with a instruction and scripts to make installation and verification explained. Folks can download it only once, read the instructions, run the scripts as needed, and bingo. What do you think??
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Rob Allen <ro...@akrabat.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Rob Allen <ro...@akrabat.com>
Date: 06/22/2018 01:46AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> On 22 Jun 2018, at 05:14, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Great thanks to folks with votes and the comments.
Wow, a lot happened on my travel day!
> As a recap of current replies we have received, we have opened a list of issues to be fixed for OpenWhisk in the coming release or further releases:
I’m happy with items 1-5. As long as the ASF incubator people are happy with a release that doesn’t have the org.apache.openwhisk.* package name, it all seems fine.
> Regarding how many repositories we are going to release, we decided to continue with the release of 13 repositories, after my discussions with many OpenWhiskers. All the 13 repos by far are great intelligent assets, which have been evolving during the past months or even years.
FWiW, I strongly disagree with this. Bertrand took a fairly cursory look over the first attempt at a release and came up with a laundry list of items to be addressed - none of which were related to the operation of the code itself or even the build process.
It’s reasonable to assume that when it goes to the Incubator people, they are going to have another list of items to address that are again nothing to do with the operation of the code.
It seems to me that it would be much easier and *polite* to get all the way through to a release tarball on the Apache servers with a single component that’s reasonably easy for the Incubator people to assess and check that we’ve got everything right.
It really doesn’t matter what it is as it’s all about the release process details. Rodric suggested wskdeploy or the GoSDK. Either would work really well as they are small and easily buildable.
I see no reason why once we successfully get the first tarball onto the Apache servers, we can’t start rolling the “big” product (the 13 inter-related tarballs) the following day as 0.9.1. If we really want 0.9.0 to be the full caboodle, then, we can do the “get-our-ducks-in-row” release of wskdeploy as 0.8.0.
Regards,
Rob
--
(“-ra” just looks wrong!)
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 9:40 AM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...I looked through https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-client-go and it is the entirely self contained -
> all go code, no deps on other openwhisk repos....
Sounds like a good candidate for a first Incubator release indeed.
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Based on all the discussion on a VOTE mail thread, we can go with the release of one module, which the main openwhisk module, for the initial Apache release.
I will prepare another VOTE mail separately. Let's close this mail thread, unless someone opposes to release main openwhisk.
Thanks.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----"David P Grove" <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: "David P Grove" <gr...@us.ibm.com>
Date: 06/22/2018 09:39AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
+1
--dave
Carlos Santana ---06/22/2018 09:23:55 AM---I will take Bertrand's mentorship advice and release 1 module This is just to go thru the ASF releas
From: Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 06/22/2018 09:23 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
I will take Bertrand's mentorship advice and release 1 module
This is just to go thru the ASF release process and voting.
To verify that the source code is free from legal problems, and follows all
the legal requirements
We just need to go thru one round with the IPMC and explain that this is
our first practice run to get the go-client 0.9.0 module
Stating that this module is part of a larger suite that will come after
Not required, but if folks want to test something about the code in the
single tgz they can run the go tests (this will compiled and run go unit
tests)
And then follow with the other 12 modules same version 0.9.0 as their
initial version for each module.
Take into account we can separate what we communicate to the outside
OpenWhisk end user community as a downloadable, deployable openwhisk
platform stack.
For example I will hold off a blog post and twitter announcement, until we
have a full suite of modules blessed/released and in the ASF dist download
site, and have a single page on the webstie (openwhisik.apache.org), that
end users that want to download and install the serverless platform stack,
can go there and and be able to download all the modules and deploy them
together, or pick one of the modules if they only need one.
--cs
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 8:52 AM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 22, 2018, at 8:18 AM, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > I mean if only release this go client code, there is nothing we can run
> it against.
>
> And that is entirely fine per all the ASF docs I’ve read. Is there a
> requirement that the code must be functional in some extended capacity?
>
> The ASF docs point out verification steps but none include actually
> running anything from what I’ve learned so far.
>
> I don’t think Bertrand, Rob, or I are saying not to release all 13 but
> rather go through with just 1 repository first end to end.
>
> The Apache motto is release early release often, no?
>
> -r
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com>.
+1
--dave
From: Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 06/22/2018 09:23 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
I will take Bertrand's mentorship advice and release 1 module
This is just to go thru the ASF release process and voting.
To verify that the source code is free from legal problems, and follows all
the legal requirements
We just need to go thru one round with the IPMC and explain that this is
our first practice run to get the go-client 0.9.0 module
Stating that this module is part of a larger suite that will come after
Not required, but if folks want to test something about the code in the
single tgz they can run the go tests (this will compiled and run go unit
tests)
And then follow with the other 12 modules same version 0.9.0 as their
initial version for each module.
Take into account we can separate what we communicate to the outside
OpenWhisk end user community as a downloadable, deployable openwhisk
platform stack.
For example I will hold off a blog post and twitter announcement, until we
have a full suite of modules blessed/released and in the ASF dist download
site, and have a single page on the webstie (openwhisik.apache.org), that
end users that want to download and install the serverless platform stack,
can go there and and be able to download all the modules and deploy them
together, or pick one of the modules if they only need one.
--cs
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 8:52 AM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 22, 2018, at 8:18 AM, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > I mean if only release this go client code, there is nothing we can run
> it against.
>
> And that is entirely fine per all the ASF docs I’ve read. Is there a
> requirement that the code must be functional in some extended capacity?
>
> The ASF docs point out verification steps but none include actually
> running anything from what I’ve learned so far.
>
> I don’t think Bertrand, Rob, or I are saying not to release all 13 but
> rather go through with just 1 repository first end to end.
>
> The Apache motto is release early release often, no?
>
> -r
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi Matt,
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 6:20 PM Matt Rutkowski <mr...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...I am fine with making it "easier" for the Incubator board...
Nitpicking: there is no "Incubator Board" - there's the Incubator PMC,
which will review the OpenWhisk releases, and the Apache Software
Foundation Board, which has nothing to do with this process (except
overseeing it from afar).
> ...If this is about making sure that they review our process/methodology/conformance then 1 repo.
> will do, but we should quickly follow with the other 12 (which should be easier after priming the system)....
Yes, that's exactly the idea!
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@apache.org>.
I am fine with making it "easier" for the Incubator board, but we should at least be ingenuous and release the main openwhisk repo. IMO
If this is about making sure that they review our process/methodology/conformance then 1 repo. will do, but we should quickly follow with the other 12 (which should be easier after priming the system).
-mr
On 2018/06/22 13:23:29, Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I will take Bertrand's mentorship advice and release 1 module
>
> This is just to go thru the ASF release process and voting.
> To verify that the source code is free from legal problems, and follows all
> the legal requirements
>
> We just need to go thru one round with the IPMC and explain that this is
> our first practice run to get the go-client 0.9.0 module
> Stating that this module is part of a larger suite that will come after
>
> Not required, but if folks want to test something about the code in the
> single tgz they can run the go tests (this will compiled and run go unit
> tests)
>
> And then follow with the other 12 modules same version 0.9.0 as their
> initial version for each module.
>
> Take into account we can separate what we communicate to the outside
> OpenWhisk end user community as a downloadable, deployable openwhisk
> platform stack.
> For example I will hold off a blog post and twitter announcement, until we
> have a full suite of modules blessed/released and in the ASF dist download
> site, and have a single page on the webstie (openwhisik.apache.org), that
> end users that want to download and install the serverless platform stack,
> can go there and and be able to download all the modules and deploy them
> together, or pick one of the modules if they only need one.
>
> --cs
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 8:52 AM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > > On Jun 22, 2018, at 8:18 AM, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I mean if only release this go client code, there is nothing we can run
> > it against.
> >
> > And that is entirely fine per all the ASF docs I’ve read. Is there a
> > requirement that the code must be functional in some extended capacity?
> >
> > The ASF docs point out verification steps but none include actually
> > running anything from what I’ve learned so far.
> >
> > I don’t think Bertrand, Rob, or I are saying not to release all 13 but
> > rather go through with just 1 repository first end to end.
> >
> > The Apache motto is release early release often, no?
> >
> > -r
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
I will take Bertrand's mentorship advice and release 1 module
This is just to go thru the ASF release process and voting.
To verify that the source code is free from legal problems, and follows all
the legal requirements
We just need to go thru one round with the IPMC and explain that this is
our first practice run to get the go-client 0.9.0 module
Stating that this module is part of a larger suite that will come after
Not required, but if folks want to test something about the code in the
single tgz they can run the go tests (this will compiled and run go unit
tests)
And then follow with the other 12 modules same version 0.9.0 as their
initial version for each module.
Take into account we can separate what we communicate to the outside
OpenWhisk end user community as a downloadable, deployable openwhisk
platform stack.
For example I will hold off a blog post and twitter announcement, until we
have a full suite of modules blessed/released and in the ASF dist download
site, and have a single page on the webstie (openwhisik.apache.org), that
end users that want to download and install the serverless platform stack,
can go there and and be able to download all the modules and deploy them
together, or pick one of the modules if they only need one.
--cs
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 8:52 AM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 22, 2018, at 8:18 AM, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > I mean if only release this go client code, there is nothing we can run
> it against.
>
> And that is entirely fine per all the ASF docs I’ve read. Is there a
> requirement that the code must be functional in some extended capacity?
>
> The ASF docs point out verification steps but none include actually
> running anything from what I’ve learned so far.
>
> I don’t think Bertrand, Rob, or I are saying not to release all 13 but
> rather go through with just 1 repository first end to end.
>
> The Apache motto is release early release often, no?
>
> -r
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Chetan,
That is really good to use Apache Maven Staging repo for our release process in future.
So far our release tool is openwhisk-release: https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release. Either manual or automated mode can push the artifacts into
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/.
I was wondering if Maven release can be integrated to current process. Feel free to open an issue and draft the plan.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Chetan Mehrotra <ch...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Chetan Mehrotra <ch...@gmail.com>
Date: 06/25/2018 06:40AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> Based on all the discussion on a VOTE mail thread, we can go with the
release of one module, which the main openwhisk module, for the initial
Apache release
@Vincent Looking at current released artifacts it appears we are only
releasing source tars. Going forward we should look into including Maven
release of various sub modules in main OpenWhisk repo like
openwhisk-common, openwhisk-controller etc as part of vote. Until vote they
would be present in Apache Maven Staging repo and post vote they would be
publish to global Maven repo. See [1] for reference.
Chetan Mehrotra
[1] http://www.apache.org/dev/publishing-maven-artifacts.html
On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 3:09 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org
> wrote:
> Hi Rodric,
>
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 2:52 PM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Jun 22, 2018, at 8:18 AM, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > ...I mean if only release this go client code, there is nothing we can
> run it against.
>
> > And that is entirely fine per all the ASF docs I’ve read. Is there a
> requirement that the code must be
> > functional in some extended capacity?...
>
> There's no such requirement for a podling release, especially not for
> your first Incubator release.
>
> I would expect that the released module has unit tests that pass when
> building it, but that module not being usable in isolation is not a
> problem, from the Incubator PMC's point of view.
>
> Of course the ultimate goal is for OpenWhisk to release fantastic
> software, we're not doing all this just to keep "the system" happy ;-)
>
> But I think "priming the system" as Matt says, by releasing a single
> module, will get us there faster and with less effort.
>
> -Bertrand
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Chetan Mehrotra <ch...@gmail.com>.
> Based on all the discussion on a VOTE mail thread, we can go with the
release of one module, which the main openwhisk module, for the initial
Apache release
@Vincent Looking at current released artifacts it appears we are only
releasing source tars. Going forward we should look into including Maven
release of various sub modules in main OpenWhisk repo like
openwhisk-common, openwhisk-controller etc as part of vote. Until vote they
would be present in Apache Maven Staging repo and post vote they would be
publish to global Maven repo. See [1] for reference.
Chetan Mehrotra
[1] http://www.apache.org/dev/publishing-maven-artifacts.html
On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 3:09 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org
> wrote:
> Hi Rodric,
>
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 2:52 PM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Jun 22, 2018, at 8:18 AM, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > ...I mean if only release this go client code, there is nothing we can
> run it against.
>
> > And that is entirely fine per all the ASF docs I’ve read. Is there a
> requirement that the code must be
> > functional in some extended capacity?...
>
> There's no such requirement for a podling release, especially not for
> your first Incubator release.
>
> I would expect that the released module has unit tests that pass when
> building it, but that module not being usable in isolation is not a
> problem, from the Incubator PMC's point of view.
>
> Of course the ultimate goal is for OpenWhisk to release fantastic
> software, we're not doing all this just to keep "the system" happy ;-)
>
> But I think "priming the system" as Matt says, by releasing a single
> module, will get us there faster and with less effort.
>
> -Bertrand
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Bertrand,
For the module main openwhisk to be released for the first time, we do not ship the test cases, since there are many packages as the test data, we do not want to ship so far. After we configure out how risky they are, we will ship the test cases.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
Date: 06/23/2018 05:39AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Hi Rodric,
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 2:52 PM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 22, 2018, at 8:18 AM, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > ...I mean if only release this go client code, there is nothing we can run it against.
> And that is entirely fine per all the ASF docs I’ve read. Is there a requirement that the code must be
> functional in some extended capacity?...
There's no such requirement for a podling release, especially not for
your first Incubator release.
I would expect that the released module has unit tests that pass when
building it, but that module not being usable in isolation is not a
problem, from the Incubator PMC's point of view.
Of course the ultimate goal is for OpenWhisk to release fantastic
software, we're not doing all this just to keep "the system" happy ;-)
But I think "priming the system" as Matt says, by releasing a single
module, will get us there faster and with less effort.
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi Rodric,
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 2:52 PM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 22, 2018, at 8:18 AM, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > ...I mean if only release this go client code, there is nothing we can run it against.
> And that is entirely fine per all the ASF docs I’ve read. Is there a requirement that the code must be
> functional in some extended capacity?...
There's no such requirement for a podling release, especially not for
your first Incubator release.
I would expect that the released module has unit tests that pass when
building it, but that module not being usable in isolation is not a
problem, from the Incubator PMC's point of view.
Of course the ultimate goal is for OpenWhisk to release fantastic
software, we're not doing all this just to keep "the system" happy ;-)
But I think "priming the system" as Matt says, by releasing a single
module, will get us there faster and with less effort.
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>.
> On Jun 22, 2018, at 8:18 AM, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> I mean if only release this go client code, there is nothing we can run it against.
And that is entirely fine per all the ASF docs I’ve read. Is there a requirement that the code must be functional in some extended capacity?
The ASF docs point out verification steps but none include actually running anything from what I’ve learned so far.
I don’t think Bertrand, Rob, or I are saying not to release all 13 but rather go through with just 1 repository first end to end.
The Apache motto is release early release often, no?
-r
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
This is pure go source code as the client. If there is no server(openwhisk not release or available), how do we test? If there is an openwhisk, we just grab it and run it. We need to add the steps as the instructions, but it is based on there is an openwhisk service running. I mean if only release this go client code, there is nothing we can run it against.
No need to build it, since it is not CLI. We do not need to generate anything.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>
Date: 06/22/2018 03:40AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> It’s reasonable to assume that when it goes to the Incubator people, they are going to have another list of items to address that are again nothing to do with the operation of the code.
Quite likely - I’m of the same opinion. So reducing the surface makes sense to me. Getting through all the way with a successful first step to release at least one of the repos is a sensible strategy given this is a first Apache release for the project.
I looked through https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-client-go and it is the entirely self contained - all go code, no deps on other openwhisk repos.
The readme doesn’t have a built step though (Or test although there are a handful of go tests in the repo).
I also don’t see why we have to use different release numbers. Each of the components was broken out to make them independently managed so why couldn’t they all eventually be released as 0.9 as part of the overall first distributions?
-r
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>.
> It’s reasonable to assume that when it goes to the Incubator people, they are going to have another list of items to address that are again nothing to do with the operation of the code.
Quite likely - I’m of the same opinion. So reducing the surface makes sense to me. Getting through all the way with a successful first step to release at least one of the repos is a sensible strategy given this is a first Apache release for the project.
I looked through https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-client-go and it is the entirely self contained - all go code, no deps on other openwhisk repos.
The readme doesn’t have a built step though (Or test although there are a handful of go tests in the repo).
I also don’t see why we have to use different release numbers. Each of the components was broken out to make them independently managed so why couldn’t they all eventually be released as 0.9 as part of the overall first distributions?
-r
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Rob Allen <ro...@akrabat.com>.
> On 22 Jun 2018, at 05:14, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Great thanks to folks with votes and the comments.
Wow, a lot happened on my travel day!
> As a recap of current replies we have received, we have opened a list of issues to be fixed for OpenWhisk in the coming release or further releases:
I’m happy with items 1-5. As long as the ASF incubator people are happy with a release that doesn’t have the org.apache.openwhisk.* package name, it all seems fine.
> Regarding how many repositories we are going to release, we decided to continue with the release of 13 repositories, after my discussions with many OpenWhiskers. All the 13 repos by far are great intelligent assets, which have been evolving during the past months or even years.
FWiW, I strongly disagree with this. Bertrand took a fairly cursory look over the first attempt at a release and came up with a laundry list of items to be addressed - none of which were related to the operation of the code itself or even the build process.
It’s reasonable to assume that when it goes to the Incubator people, they are going to have another list of items to address that are again nothing to do with the operation of the code.
It seems to me that it would be much easier and *polite* to get all the way through to a release tarball on the Apache servers with a single component that’s reasonably easy for the Incubator people to assess and check that we’ve got everything right.
It really doesn’t matter what it is as it’s all about the release process details. Rodric suggested wskdeploy or the GoSDK. Either would work really well as they are small and easily buildable.
I see no reason why once we successfully get the first tarball onto the Apache servers, we can’t start rolling the “big” product (the 13 inter-related tarballs) the following day as 0.9.1. If we really want 0.9.0 to be the full caboodle, then, we can do the “get-our-ducks-in-row” release of wskdeploy as 0.8.0.
Regards,
Rob
--
(“-ra” just looks wrong!)
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Great thanks to folks with votes and the comments.
As a recap of current replies we have received, we have opened a list of issues to be fixed for OpenWhisk in the coming release or further releases:
1. Add the tutorial for 0.9.0 to build and deploy locally with source code
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/issues/197, we will resolve it for 0.9.0
2. Add the instruction on how to verify the license header for each valid source code file
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/issues/196, we will resolve it for 0.9.0
3. Add scripts to make download, unzip and installation of source code easier
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/issues/198, we will resolve it for 0.9.0
4. Add the instruction to the private key and credentials
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/issues/3800, we will resolve it for 0.9.0
5. Renaming the package from whisk.* into org.apache.openwhisk.*
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/issues/3797 We need to defer it for next release, since all the repos depend on the naming convention so far. It takes great effort and collaboration, because it affects existing offerings.
Regarding how many repositories we are going to release, we decided to continue with the release of 13 repositories, after my discussions with many OpenWhiskers. All the 13 repos by far are great intelligent assets, which have been evolving during the past months or even years. They all play important roles to make openwhisk complete, and users/contributors are longing to see them distributed. Contributors in OpenWhisk have done great work to all of them and we are confident with source code, and there will be more openwhisk repositories in future, as openwhisk attracts more contributors with good ideas. Based on my experiences with cooperating with people from Apache, I also believe that Apache members are passionate about technologies and desire to try out new projects, by fulfilling their duties with their evaluations and feedback.
Except the issues we have above, does anyone have any other concerns we need to take into account for the 0.9.0 release? If so, this is the chance to raise it; if not, we shall proceed the, after we made the minor fixes to the above listed issues.
Thank you.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----"Matt Rutkowski" <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: "Matt Rutkowski" <mr...@us.ibm.com>
Date: 06/21/2018 12:08PM
Cc: "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Hi Bertrand,
>>>> ...Plus a single repo. source is not usable by itself and its build
dependent
>>>> on the other parts as I mentioned earlier...
>>Right, it if cannot be built that's a problem - but if you say that I
>>suppose there's a build order that must be followed?
>>If that's correct those overall build instructions should be included
>>with the set of release archives.
As required, the main openwhisk README (and supporting) docs include
instructions on how to build (and tooling that makes it quite easy). We
can open an issue to better document suggest manual build order. Will
talk to Vincent to see if he has time today as I am leaving soon to return
Monday.
-mr
From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 06/21/2018 11:00 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Hi Matt,
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 5:27 PM Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>
wrote:
> ...Are you saying you believe the Incubator PMC
> will fail us strictly due to having 13 tgz/tar files vs. 1 for a first
> release?...
I don't know (and someone's welcome to ask on the
general@incubator.a.o list to find out), but that looks unusual to me,
and more work for reviewers that might need to unpack 13 archives to
find similar issues in several of them.
That's why I focused on just one archive here, and found a few
interesting things already - the other 12 archives have not been
useful for my initial review.
> ...Are you saying they need to be "eased into the concept" because we
will
> have 13 (now and more eventually); at some point the board will be
exposed
> to multiples...
No, it's just a practical question and fairness for the reviewers,
where multiple archives might not say much more than one about the
readiness of OpenWhisk to make Apache Releases.
The ASF Board is not involved with releases, it's just the Incubator
PMC in this case, for a podling.
> ...Plus a single repo. source is not usable by itself and its build
dependent
> on the other parts as I mentioned earlier...
Right, it if cannot be built that's a problem - but if you say that I
suppose there's a build order that must be followed?
If that's correct those overall build instructions should be included
with the set of release archives.
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>.
Hi Bertrand,
>>>> ...Plus a single repo. source is not usable by itself and its build
dependent
>>>> on the other parts as I mentioned earlier...
>>Right, it if cannot be built that's a problem - but if you say that I
>>suppose there's a build order that must be followed?
>>If that's correct those overall build instructions should be included
>>with the set of release archives.
As required, the main openwhisk README (and supporting) docs include
instructions on how to build (and tooling that makes it quite easy). We
can open an issue to better document suggest manual build order. Will
talk to Vincent to see if he has time today as I am leaving soon to return
Monday.
-mr
From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 06/21/2018 11:00 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Hi Matt,
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 5:27 PM Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>
wrote:
> ...Are you saying you believe the Incubator PMC
> will fail us strictly due to having 13 tgz/tar files vs. 1 for a first
> release?...
I don't know (and someone's welcome to ask on the
general@incubator.a.o list to find out), but that looks unusual to me,
and more work for reviewers that might need to unpack 13 archives to
find similar issues in several of them.
That's why I focused on just one archive here, and found a few
interesting things already - the other 12 archives have not been
useful for my initial review.
> ...Are you saying they need to be "eased into the concept" because we
will
> have 13 (now and more eventually); at some point the board will be
exposed
> to multiples...
No, it's just a practical question and fairness for the reviewers,
where multiple archives might not say much more than one about the
readiness of OpenWhisk to make Apache Releases.
The ASF Board is not involved with releases, it's just the Incubator
PMC in this case, for a podling.
> ...Plus a single repo. source is not usable by itself and its build
dependent
> on the other parts as I mentioned earlier...
Right, it if cannot be built that's a problem - but if you say that I
suppose there's a build order that must be followed?
If that's correct those overall build instructions should be included
with the set of release archives.
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi Matt,
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 5:27 PM Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> ...Are you saying you believe the Incubator PMC
> will fail us strictly due to having 13 tgz/tar files vs. 1 for a first
> release?...
I don't know (and someone's welcome to ask on the
general@incubator.a.o list to find out), but that looks unusual to me,
and more work for reviewers that might need to unpack 13 archives to
find similar issues in several of them.
That's why I focused on just one archive here, and found a few
interesting things already - the other 12 archives have not been
useful for my initial review.
> ...Are you saying they need to be "eased into the concept" because we will
> have 13 (now and more eventually); at some point the board will be exposed
> to multiples...
No, it's just a practical question and fairness for the reviewers,
where multiple archives might not say much more than one about the
readiness of OpenWhisk to make Apache Releases.
The ASF Board is not involved with releases, it's just the Incubator
PMC in this case, for a podling.
> ...Plus a single repo. source is not usable by itself and its build dependent
> on the other parts as I mentioned earlier...
Right, it if cannot be built that's a problem - but if you say that I
suppose there's a build order that must be followed?
If that's correct those overall build instructions should be included
with the set of release archives.
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>.
Hi Bertrand,
I am not sure I understand. Are you saying you believe the Incubator PMC
will fail us strictly due to having 13 tgz/tar files vs. 1 for a first
release? Again, it makes no sense to me as it is strictly a choice of
logical separation (representative of our architectural parts) and
packaging? Surely you see that can and it is technically not hard to
explain.
Are you saying they need to be "eased into the concept" because we will
have 13 (now and more eventually); at some point the board will be exposed
to multiples.
Plus a single repo. source is not usable by itself and its build dependent
on the other parts as I mentioned earlier.
Kind regards,
Matt
From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 06/21/2018 10:17 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Hi Matt,
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 5:03 PM Matt Rutkowski <mr...@apache.org>
wrote:
> ...For now, I am quite happy with releasing all together....
We can try, but as I said I'm not sure if the Incubator PMC will
accept this for a first release.
Even releasing a single module that's not usable by itself is progress
w.r.t. the incubation process, where it's the process and legal
aspects that count, for initial incubating releases, more than the
technical viability of the product. There's even no obligation to
"advertise" those releases, considering them training releases is
fine.
But we can try if that's what the majority of the PPMC wants and if
the other mentors do not disagree.
> ...BTW, I am more than happy to formalize and represent this position
(along with the
> history) to make it clear for others during the review process....
I think it's easy to understand the technical justification for
releasing multiple modules together - my angle is just the "incubation
training" one.
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi Matt,
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 5:03 PM Matt Rutkowski <mr...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...For now, I am quite happy with releasing all together....
We can try, but as I said I'm not sure if the Incubator PMC will
accept this for a first release.
Even releasing a single module that's not usable by itself is progress
w.r.t. the incubation process, where it's the process and legal
aspects that count, for initial incubating releases, more than the
technical viability of the product. There's even no obligation to
"advertise" those releases, considering them training releases is
fine.
But we can try if that's what the majority of the PPMC wants and if
the other mentors do not disagree.
> ...BTW, I am more than happy to formalize and represent this position (along with the
> history) to make it clear for others during the review process....
I think it's easy to understand the technical justification for
releasing multiple modules together - my angle is just the "incubation
training" one.
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@apache.org>.
Hi Bertrand,
I do not believe we should (or can) release just one repo. at this time (my vote is continue with current artifact granularity). In the future, we can work to enable individual repo. release over time as well (describe via process/tools), but most of these repos. must be released together for compatibility. IMO, we made a decision early in the project to separate component parts of our architecture into individual repos. for many good, well considered reasons.
Primarily the project represents a complex PaaS platform with many moving parts (both client and server) with different requirements for skills and languages, but all interdependent on each other by inherent versioning of APIs and Service Provider Interfaces, as well as runtime conventions. In reality we cannot release just even the main OW repo. since it's build is dependent on the other repos.' images. It is disingenuous at best IMO.
Releasing individual repos. without clear documentation of these still changing surfaces really does not work. It is something the community well knows, has been discussed several times, is documented as a future "goal".
For now, I am quite happy with releasing all together. I look at it this way... we could simply TAR all the repos. into one big TAR (to no real benefit other than to get 1 file). Code is code, packaging is packaging; in the end that all it really represents.
BTW, I am more than happy to formalize and represent this position (along with the history) to make it clear for others during the review process.
/soapbox off
-MR
On 2018/06/21 13:08:23, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Vincent,
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 2:53 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > ...Does it mean we can try to release one of the 13 modules, like openwhisk, or openwhisk-cli, or consolidate
> > all the 13 projects into one for release?...
>
> The former, I would say?
>
> It's probably more convenient for your users and w.r.t release cycles?
>
> For Apache Sling, as an example which is extremely modular, we do lots
> of individual module releases all the time, and about once a year do a
> "big bang" release that includes all core module.
>
> A model like that might be good for OpenWhisk, but as this stage as
> mentioned for a first "training release" it's probably best to stick
> to one typical module to refine the process.
>
> ...
> > * The key can be accessed at https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS. You missed "dev/" in your link...
>
> Ah ok, sorry! Got it now.
>
> > ...* So far the header is not verified with RAT. We have a unitiy repo call
> > openwhisk-utility(https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-utilities) to scan all the code. RAT has issues,
> > since I have never got it running correctly in openwhisk. The Travis build uses this openwhisk-utility to verify the
> > headers for every incoming commit....
>
> Ok. The "how to I run the utility to verify the license headers"
> question should be answerable with a URL, maybe the docs of that
> utility?
> People will need to be able to run it standalone to do their own verifications.
>
> > * RSA private key should have some instructions. We will work on it...
>
> Great
>
> > * We do not release binary this time...
>
> Yes - I was checking for binaries that might have been leftover, saw
> none and that's good!
>
> > * We will look at the .scala code files...
>
> Ok. If the package name change is too disruptive it can be postponed
> for later during incubation, but that needs to be tracked.
>
> > * For README, let me make the build instruction more clear...
>
> Thanks!
>
> I suppose this means this vote is canceled until you have a new
> release candidate?
>
> -Bertrand
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi Vincent,
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 2:53 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> ...Does it mean we can try to release one of the 13 modules, like openwhisk, or openwhisk-cli, or consolidate
> all the 13 projects into one for release?...
The former, I would say?
It's probably more convenient for your users and w.r.t release cycles?
For Apache Sling, as an example which is extremely modular, we do lots
of individual module releases all the time, and about once a year do a
"big bang" release that includes all core module.
A model like that might be good for OpenWhisk, but as this stage as
mentioned for a first "training release" it's probably best to stick
to one typical module to refine the process.
...
> * The key can be accessed at https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS. You missed "dev/" in your link...
Ah ok, sorry! Got it now.
> ...* So far the header is not verified with RAT. We have a unitiy repo call
> openwhisk-utility(https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-utilities) to scan all the code. RAT has issues,
> since I have never got it running correctly in openwhisk. The Travis build uses this openwhisk-utility to verify the
> headers for every incoming commit....
Ok. The "how to I run the utility to verify the license headers"
question should be answerable with a URL, maybe the docs of that
utility?
People will need to be able to run it standalone to do their own verifications.
> * RSA private key should have some instructions. We will work on it...
Great
> * We do not release binary this time...
Yes - I was checking for binaries that might have been leftover, saw
none and that's good!
> * We will look at the .scala code files...
Ok. If the package name change is too disruptive it can be postponed
for later during incubation, but that needs to be tracked.
> * For README, let me make the build instruction more clear...
Thanks!
I suppose this means this vote is canceled until you have a new
release candidate?
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Hi Bertrand,
Thank you very much for your comments.
Let me clarify what you mean by one module:
Does it mean we can try to release one of the 13 modules, like openwhisk, or openwhisk-cli, or consolidate all the 13 projects into one for release?
* The key can be accessed at https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS. You missed "dev/" in your link.
* So far the header is not verified with RAT. We have a unitiy repo call openwhisk-utility(https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-utilities) to scan all the code. RAT has issues, since I have never got it running correctly in openwhisk. The Travis build uses this openwhisk-utility to verify the headers for every incoming commit.
* RSA private key should have some instructions. We will work on it.
* We do not release binary this time.
* We will look at the .scala code files.
* For README, let me make the build instruction more clear.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
Date: 06/21/2018 07:04AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Hi Vincent,
Thanks for your work in preparing this release!
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:16 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> ...There are totally 13 OpenWhisk projects within this release....
As mentioned earlier I don't think it is a good idea to release
multiple modules in your first Incubator release: if a single module
has a problem the whole release will fail, and it's not convenient for
Incubator PMC reviewers (who might not be very familiar with your
code) to review multiple modules in one go. I'm not sure if the
Incubator PMC would even accept voting on multiple artifacts with a
single vote.
I recommend releasing one module first, to validate the release voting
process and to get feedback that's probably applicable for other
modules as well.
With this in mind I have just looked at
openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz so far, here are my
comments:
1) The digests match.
2) The 22CC20CC key used to sign the release is not available at
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
(that file doesn't exist) nor at
https://people.apache.org/keys/group/openwhisk.asc
3) I don't find build instructions in the README (which is also at
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk), for convenience
I'm not very familiar with gradle, tried this:
./gradlew tasks
doesn't show anything specific to OpenWhisk IIUC
./gradlew tasks --all
shows many tasks, it's unclear where to start
I usually expect to see clear build instructions in such a release
archive, but maybe I missed something.
4) LICENSE, DISCLAIMER, NOTICE look good to me
5) The .scala code files are in whisk.* packages, that should be
org.apache.openwhisk.* for an Apache project.
6) I suppose you used Apache Rat to validate the license headers, I
don't see instructions on how to run it to make those checks myself.
7) There's an RSA private key in the source archive, if it's for
testing purposes it should be clearly identified as such (ideally
named test- something) to reassure people that it's not problematic to
distribute it (./ansible/roles/nginx/files/openwhisk-server-key.pem).
8) I don't see binary files in the release archive which is good,
except for ./gradle/wrapper/gradle-wrapper.jar which I think is
acceptable - but its digest should be kept track of, maybe in a jira
ticket so people can validate it if they want.
Those are the types of comments that you might get when the Incubator
PMC validates releases, I suppose many of them apply to multiple
projects so it's easier to start with just one module, fix or clarify
these things and then do the rest.
-Bertrand (with my incubation mentor hat on)
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi Vincent,
Thanks for your work in preparing this release!
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:16 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> ...There are totally 13 OpenWhisk projects within this release....
As mentioned earlier I don't think it is a good idea to release
multiple modules in your first Incubator release: if a single module
has a problem the whole release will fail, and it's not convenient for
Incubator PMC reviewers (who might not be very familiar with your
code) to review multiple modules in one go. I'm not sure if the
Incubator PMC would even accept voting on multiple artifacts with a
single vote.
I recommend releasing one module first, to validate the release voting
process and to get feedback that's probably applicable for other
modules as well.
With this in mind I have just looked at
openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz so far, here are my
comments:
1) The digests match.
2) The 22CC20CC key used to sign the release is not available at
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
(that file doesn't exist) nor at
https://people.apache.org/keys/group/openwhisk.asc
3) I don't find build instructions in the README (which is also at
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk), for convenience
I'm not very familiar with gradle, tried this:
./gradlew tasks
doesn't show anything specific to OpenWhisk IIUC
./gradlew tasks --all
shows many tasks, it's unclear where to start
I usually expect to see clear build instructions in such a release
archive, but maybe I missed something.
4) LICENSE, DISCLAIMER, NOTICE look good to me
5) The .scala code files are in whisk.* packages, that should be
org.apache.openwhisk.* for an Apache project.
6) I suppose you used Apache Rat to validate the license headers, I
don't see instructions on how to run it to make those checks myself.
7) There's an RSA private key in the source archive, if it's for
testing purposes it should be clearly identified as such (ideally
named test- something) to reassure people that it's not problematic to
distribute it (./ansible/roles/nginx/files/openwhisk-server-key.pem).
8) I don't see binary files in the release archive which is good,
except for ./gradle/wrapper/gradle-wrapper.jar which I think is
acceptable - but its digest should be kept track of, maybe in a jira
ticket so people can validate it if they want.
Those are the types of comments that you might get when the Incubator
PMC validates releases, I suppose many of them apply to multiple
projects so it's easier to start with just one module, fix or clarify
these things and then do the rest.
-Bertrand (with my incubation mentor hat on)
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
I will try to go over the artifacts tomorrow.
Please if you vote +1 please state what things you validated.
r
Release votes are not normally popular voting, is actually downloading the
artifacts, to catch mistakes earlier before getting the release out.
Since we, meaning Vincent :-) have invested a lot of effort on automating
all the things, verification of license items, and actually using Travis to
test the stability of the components, we should high confidence on the
artifacts.
--cs
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 5:34 PM Dascalita Dragos <dd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A big +1
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 2:16 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk
> > 0.9.0-incubating.
> >
> > List of JIRA ticket(s) resolved for this release can be found at
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-213.
> >
> > To learn more about Apache OpenWhisk, please visit
> > https://openwhisk.apache.org/.
> >
> > This release comprises of source code distribution only. There are
> totally
> > 13 OpenWhisk projects within this release. The artifacts were built from
> > the following Git commit IDs:
> > * openwhisk: 071d841, Make test-instances of Exec depend on the loaded
> > manifest.
> > * openwhisk-client-go: 1e50522, Add the DISCLAIMER file for Apache
> > incubator project
> > * openwhisk-cli: 461f94f, add OS and CPU architecture to user agent
> header
> > * openwhisk-catalog: 517341d, Add the DISCLAIMER file for Apache
> incubator
> > project
> > * openwhisk-wskdeploy: 7620ef7, disabling export integration
> > * openwhisk-apigateway: 2b87366, Fix awk command in init.sh generating
> > resolvers.conf file
> > * openwhisk-deploy-kube: cb9c3f5, Update runtimes for upstream changes.
> > * openwhisk-runtime-nodejs: 557c4bd, update nodejs 6 & 8 to latest
> > security patch
> > * openwhisk-runtime-java: b20f90e, Add skip_pull_runtimes for Travis CI
> > * openwhisk-runtime-swift: 06c4972, update travis to push "master" tag to
> > Docker on "master" branch merges
> > * openwhisk-runtime-python: a2098d9, update travis to push "master" tag
> to
> > Docker on "master" branch merges
> > * openwhisk-runtime-php: b0834a5, Fix travis publish 72
> > * openwhisk-runtime-docker: 650842a, Add ActionProxyContainer tests
> >
> > All the source code artifacts can be found at:
> >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/
> >
> > Each source code artifact can be found via:
> >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/[project
> > name]-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
> >
> > The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
> >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/[project
> > name]-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
> >
> > The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
> >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/[project
> > name]-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
> >
> > KEYS file is available here:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
> >
> >
> > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk
> 0.9.0-incubating.
> >
> > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> > [ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
> >
> > Thank you very much.
> >
> >
> > Checklist for reference:
> > [ ] Download links are valid.
> > [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> > [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
> release.
> > [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> > [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> > [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
> >
> >
> > Best wishes.
> > Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
> >
> > Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> > Cloud
> >
> > Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> > Phone: +1(919)254-7182 <(919)%20254-7182> <(919)%20254-7182>
> > Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd
> > <https://maps.google.com/?q=4205+S+Miami+Blvd&entry=gmail&source=g>
> > (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Dascalita Dragos <dd...@gmail.com>.
A big +1
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 2:16 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk
> 0.9.0-incubating.
>
> List of JIRA ticket(s) resolved for this release can be found at
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-213.
>
> To learn more about Apache OpenWhisk, please visit
> https://openwhisk.apache.org/.
>
> This release comprises of source code distribution only. There are totally
> 13 OpenWhisk projects within this release. The artifacts were built from
> the following Git commit IDs:
> * openwhisk: 071d841, Make test-instances of Exec depend on the loaded
> manifest.
> * openwhisk-client-go: 1e50522, Add the DISCLAIMER file for Apache
> incubator project
> * openwhisk-cli: 461f94f, add OS and CPU architecture to user agent header
> * openwhisk-catalog: 517341d, Add the DISCLAIMER file for Apache incubator
> project
> * openwhisk-wskdeploy: 7620ef7, disabling export integration
> * openwhisk-apigateway: 2b87366, Fix awk command in init.sh generating
> resolvers.conf file
> * openwhisk-deploy-kube: cb9c3f5, Update runtimes for upstream changes.
> * openwhisk-runtime-nodejs: 557c4bd, update nodejs 6 & 8 to latest
> security patch
> * openwhisk-runtime-java: b20f90e, Add skip_pull_runtimes for Travis CI
> * openwhisk-runtime-swift: 06c4972, update travis to push "master" tag to
> Docker on "master" branch merges
> * openwhisk-runtime-python: a2098d9, update travis to push "master" tag to
> Docker on "master" branch merges
> * openwhisk-runtime-php: b0834a5, Fix travis publish 72
> * openwhisk-runtime-docker: 650842a, Add ActionProxyContainer tests
>
> All the source code artifacts can be found at:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/
>
> Each source code artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/[project
> name]-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
>
> The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/[project
> name]-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
>
> The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/[project
> name]-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
>
> KEYS file is available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
>
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> [ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
>
> Thank you very much.
>
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ ] Download links are valid.
> [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
> [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182 <(919)%20254-7182>
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=4205+S+Miami+Blvd&entry=gmail&source=g>
> (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
>
>
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
James
Check out the docs directory in the release repo for example
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/blob/master/docs/release_instructions.md
That was the intention from the start to automate everything, and to have
instructions for any committer to be a release manager for a module/artifact
-cs
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 2:21 PM James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can we also write up the release process in markdown and store in in the
> repo to help future release managers (unless Vincent wants to do it forever
> :))?
>
> On 20 June 2018 at 20:59, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > Give me the honor to the initiative as the first release manager of
> > OpenWhisk.
> > The first version is named after "0.9.0-incubating", based on the
> semantic
> > version 2.0.
> > I am preparing the email for VOTE now. I will send out the email by the
> > end of today.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best wishes.
> > Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
> >
> > Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> > Cloud
> >
> > Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> > Phone: +1(919)254-7182 <(919)%20254-7182>
> > Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United
> > States
> >
> > -----"Matt Rutkowski" <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
> > To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> > From: "Matt Rutkowski" <mr...@us.ibm.com>
> > Date: 06/20/2018 03:05PM
> > Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
> >
> > Agree, Vincent should be first Release Manager. Do we have a champagne
> > bottle somewhere?
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Matt
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>
> > To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> > Date: 06/20/2018 01:36 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
> >
> >
> >
> > Vincent,
> >
> > If it's not already clear :-), I think should do the honors, and be
> > release
> > manager for the first release :-)
> > I'm out most of the month of July (vacation). But will volunteer to do a
> > release in August
> >
> > Thread to dev list for vote should have the following Subject "[VOTE]
> > Release Apache OpenWhisk (incubating) version 0.9.0"
> > And include the details of the location of the RC, and the instructions
> > for
> > voting including the deadline of 72 hours.
> >
> > Release Candidate 1 should be located in
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/
> >
> > It's a requirement that artifacts need to include the string "incubating"
> > as part of the version.
> > Since we are trying to use semantic versioning "incubating" should be at
> > the end.
> >
> > dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating.tar.gz
> > dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-apigateway-0.9.
> > 0-incubating.tar.gz
> > dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-cli-0.9.0-incubating.tar.gz
> > ...
> >
> > We should remove "incubator", and put "incubating" at the end.
> > Also I would remove "sources" from the name. Only sources are distributed
> > on apache servers.
> > After graduation, we stop using "-incubating"
> >
> > -cs
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 1:39 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > So far, we can formally name the first version incubator-0.9.0 to
> > indicate
> > > the incubator status as well, and use subversion like rc1, rc2, etc,
> > before
> > > moving the artifacts to the final release SVN URL.
> > >
> > > For incubator-0.9.0-rc1, the package of source code openwhisk in the
> dev
> > > SVN URL is named after
> > openwhisk-apigateway-incubator-0.9.0-sources.tar.gz
> > > under the folder of apache-openwhisk-incubator-0.9.0-rc1.
> > >
> > > Shall we include the name "incubator" as part of the version name? Or
> it
> > > does not sound attractive.
> > >
> > >
> > > Best wishes.
> > > Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
> > >
> > > Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contrib
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=OpenWhisk+Contrib&entry=gmail&source=g>utor,
> Open Technology, IBM
> > > Cloud
> > >
> > > Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> > > Phone: +1(919)254-7182 <(919)%20254-7182> <(919)%20254-7182>
> > > Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd
> > > <
> > https://maps.google.com/?q=4205+S+Miami+Blvd&entry=gmail&source=g
> > >
> > > (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
> > >
> > > -----James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
> > > To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> > > From: James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com>
> > > Date: 06/20/2018 01:17PM
> > > Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
> > >
> > > 0.9 makes sense to me.
> > >
> > > Something to think about it - what would constitute a 1.0 release?
> > Whilst
> > > the platform is still evolving rapidly, it has been in production on
> > > multiple providers for over 12 months. What things would we like to
> tick
> > > off before reaching this stage?
> > >
> > > On 20 June 2018 at 17:38, Michele Sciabarra <op...@sciabarra.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I agree with 0.9.0
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Michele Sciabarra
> > > > openwhisk@sciabarra.com
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:37 PM, Michele Sciabarra wrote:
> > > > > I agree with 0.9.0.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Michele Sciabarra
> > > > > michele@sciabarra.com
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:31 PM, Rob Allen wrote:
> > > > > > On 20 Jun 2018, at 16:24, Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Can we go with 0.9.0?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 0.9.0 is fine with me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Rob
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > James Thomas
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> James Thomas
>
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com>.
Can we also write up the release process in markdown and store in in the
repo to help future release managers (unless Vincent wants to do it forever
:))?
On 20 June 2018 at 20:59, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Give me the honor to the initiative as the first release manager of
> OpenWhisk.
> The first version is named after "0.9.0-incubating", based on the semantic
> version 2.0.
> I am preparing the email for VOTE now. I will send out the email by the
> end of today.
>
>
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United
> States
>
> -----"Matt Rutkowski" <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> From: "Matt Rutkowski" <mr...@us.ibm.com>
> Date: 06/20/2018 03:05PM
> Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
>
> Agree, Vincent should be first Release Manager. Do we have a champagne
> bottle somewhere?
>
> Kind regards,
> Matt
>
>
>
> From: Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> Date: 06/20/2018 01:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
>
>
>
> Vincent,
>
> If it's not already clear :-), I think should do the honors, and be
> release
> manager for the first release :-)
> I'm out most of the month of July (vacation). But will volunteer to do a
> release in August
>
> Thread to dev list for vote should have the following Subject "[VOTE]
> Release Apache OpenWhisk (incubating) version 0.9.0"
> And include the details of the location of the RC, and the instructions
> for
> voting including the deadline of 72 hours.
>
> Release Candidate 1 should be located in
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/
>
> It's a requirement that artifacts need to include the string "incubating"
> as part of the version.
> Since we are trying to use semantic versioning "incubating" should be at
> the end.
>
> dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating.tar.gz
> dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-apigateway-0.9.
> 0-incubating.tar.gz
> dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-cli-0.9.0-incubating.tar.gz
> ...
>
> We should remove "incubator", and put "incubating" at the end.
> Also I would remove "sources" from the name. Only sources are distributed
> on apache servers.
> After graduation, we stop using "-incubating"
>
> -cs
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 1:39 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > So far, we can formally name the first version incubator-0.9.0 to
> indicate
> > the incubator status as well, and use subversion like rc1, rc2, etc,
> before
> > moving the artifacts to the final release SVN URL.
> >
> > For incubator-0.9.0-rc1, the package of source code openwhisk in the dev
> > SVN URL is named after
> openwhisk-apigateway-incubator-0.9.0-sources.tar.gz
> > under the folder of apache-openwhisk-incubator-0.9.0-rc1.
> >
> > Shall we include the name "incubator" as part of the version name? Or it
> > does not sound attractive.
> >
> >
> > Best wishes.
> > Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
> >
> > Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> > Cloud
> >
> > Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> > Phone: +1(919)254-7182 <(919)%20254-7182>
> > Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd
> > <
> https://maps.google.com/?q=4205+S+Miami+Blvd&entry=gmail&source=g
> >
> > (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
> >
> > -----James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
> > To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> > From: James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com>
> > Date: 06/20/2018 01:17PM
> > Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
> >
> > 0.9 makes sense to me.
> >
> > Something to think about it - what would constitute a 1.0 release?
> Whilst
> > the platform is still evolving rapidly, it has been in production on
> > multiple providers for over 12 months. What things would we like to tick
> > off before reaching this stage?
> >
> > On 20 June 2018 at 17:38, Michele Sciabarra <op...@sciabarra.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I agree with 0.9.0
> > >
> > > --
> > > Michele Sciabarra
> > > openwhisk@sciabarra.com
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:37 PM, Michele Sciabarra wrote:
> > > > I agree with 0.9.0.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Michele Sciabarra
> > > > michele@sciabarra.com
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:31 PM, Rob Allen wrote:
> > > > > On 20 Jun 2018, at 16:24, Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Can we go with 0.9.0?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 0.9.0 is fine with me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Rob
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > James Thomas
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Regards,
James Thomas
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Give me the honor to the initiative as the first release manager of OpenWhisk.
The first version is named after "0.9.0-incubating", based on the semantic version 2.0.
I am preparing the email for VOTE now. I will send out the email by the end of today.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----"Matt Rutkowski" <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: "Matt Rutkowski" <mr...@us.ibm.com>
Date: 06/20/2018 03:05PM
Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Agree, Vincent should be first Release Manager. Do we have a champagne
bottle somewhere?
Kind regards,
Matt
From: Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 06/20/2018 01:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Vincent,
If it's not already clear :-), I think should do the honors, and be
release
manager for the first release :-)
I'm out most of the month of July (vacation). But will volunteer to do a
release in August
Thread to dev list for vote should have the following Subject "[VOTE]
Release Apache OpenWhisk (incubating) version 0.9.0"
And include the details of the location of the RC, and the instructions
for
voting including the deadline of 72 hours.
Release Candidate 1 should be located in
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/
It's a requirement that artifacts need to include the string "incubating"
as part of the version.
Since we are trying to use semantic versioning "incubating" should be at
the end.
dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating.tar.gz
dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-apigateway-0.9.0-incubating.tar.gz
dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-cli-0.9.0-incubating.tar.gz
...
We should remove "incubator", and put "incubating" at the end.
Also I would remove "sources" from the name. Only sources are distributed
on apache servers.
After graduation, we stop using "-incubating"
-cs
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 1:39 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> So far, we can formally name the first version incubator-0.9.0 to
indicate
> the incubator status as well, and use subversion like rc1, rc2, etc,
before
> moving the artifacts to the final release SVN URL.
>
> For incubator-0.9.0-rc1, the package of source code openwhisk in the dev
> SVN URL is named after
openwhisk-apigateway-incubator-0.9.0-sources.tar.gz
> under the folder of apache-openwhisk-incubator-0.9.0-rc1.
>
> Shall we include the name "incubator" as part of the version name? Or it
> does not sound attractive.
>
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182 <(919)%20254-7182>
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd
> <
https://maps.google.com/?q=4205+S+Miami+Blvd&entry=gmail&source=g
>
> (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
>
> -----James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> From: James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com>
> Date: 06/20/2018 01:17PM
> Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
>
> 0.9 makes sense to me.
>
> Something to think about it - what would constitute a 1.0 release?
Whilst
> the platform is still evolving rapidly, it has been in production on
> multiple providers for over 12 months. What things would we like to tick
> off before reaching this stage?
>
> On 20 June 2018 at 17:38, Michele Sciabarra <op...@sciabarra.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree with 0.9.0
> >
> > --
> > Michele Sciabarra
> > openwhisk@sciabarra.com
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:37 PM, Michele Sciabarra wrote:
> > > I agree with 0.9.0.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Michele Sciabarra
> > > michele@sciabarra.com
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:31 PM, Rob Allen wrote:
> > > > On 20 Jun 2018, at 16:24, Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Can we go with 0.9.0?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > 0.9.0 is fine with me.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Rob
> > > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> James Thomas
>
>
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>.
Agree, Vincent should be first Release Manager. Do we have a champagne
bottle somewhere?
Kind regards,
Matt
From: Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 06/20/2018 01:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Vincent,
If it's not already clear :-), I think should do the honors, and be
release
manager for the first release :-)
I'm out most of the month of July (vacation). But will volunteer to do a
release in August
Thread to dev list for vote should have the following Subject "[VOTE]
Release Apache OpenWhisk (incubating) version 0.9.0"
And include the details of the location of the RC, and the instructions
for
voting including the deadline of 72 hours.
Release Candidate 1 should be located in
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/
It's a requirement that artifacts need to include the string "incubating"
as part of the version.
Since we are trying to use semantic versioning "incubating" should be at
the end.
dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating.tar.gz
dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-apigateway-0.9.0-incubating.tar.gz
dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-cli-0.9.0-incubating.tar.gz
...
We should remove "incubator", and put "incubating" at the end.
Also I would remove "sources" from the name. Only sources are distributed
on apache servers.
After graduation, we stop using "-incubating"
-cs
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 1:39 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> So far, we can formally name the first version incubator-0.9.0 to
indicate
> the incubator status as well, and use subversion like rc1, rc2, etc,
before
> moving the artifacts to the final release SVN URL.
>
> For incubator-0.9.0-rc1, the package of source code openwhisk in the dev
> SVN URL is named after
openwhisk-apigateway-incubator-0.9.0-sources.tar.gz
> under the folder of apache-openwhisk-incubator-0.9.0-rc1.
>
> Shall we include the name "incubator" as part of the version name? Or it
> does not sound attractive.
>
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182 <(919)%20254-7182>
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd
> <
https://maps.google.com/?q=4205+S+Miami+Blvd&entry=gmail&source=g
>
> (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
>
> -----James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> From: James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com>
> Date: 06/20/2018 01:17PM
> Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
>
> 0.9 makes sense to me.
>
> Something to think about it - what would constitute a 1.0 release?
Whilst
> the platform is still evolving rapidly, it has been in production on
> multiple providers for over 12 months. What things would we like to tick
> off before reaching this stage?
>
> On 20 June 2018 at 17:38, Michele Sciabarra <op...@sciabarra.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree with 0.9.0
> >
> > --
> > Michele Sciabarra
> > openwhisk@sciabarra.com
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:37 PM, Michele Sciabarra wrote:
> > > I agree with 0.9.0.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Michele Sciabarra
> > > michele@sciabarra.com
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:31 PM, Rob Allen wrote:
> > > > On 20 Jun 2018, at 16:24, Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Can we go with 0.9.0?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > 0.9.0 is fine with me.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Rob
> > > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> James Thomas
>
>
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
Vincent,
If it's not already clear :-), I think should do the honors, and be release
manager for the first release :-)
I'm out most of the month of July (vacation). But will volunteer to do a
release in August
Thread to dev list for vote should have the following Subject "[VOTE]
Release Apache OpenWhisk (incubating) version 0.9.0"
And include the details of the location of the RC, and the instructions for
voting including the deadline of 72 hours.
Release Candidate 1 should be located in
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/
It's a requirement that artifacts need to include the string "incubating"
as part of the version.
Since we are trying to use semantic versioning "incubating" should be at
the end.
dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating.tar.gz
dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-apigateway-0.9.0-incubating.tar.gz
dev/incubator/openwhisk/0.9.0/RC1/openwhisk-cli-0.9.0-incubating.tar.gz
...
We should remove "incubator", and put "incubating" at the end.
Also I would remove "sources" from the name. Only sources are distributed
on apache servers.
After graduation, we stop using "-incubating"
-cs
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 1:39 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> So far, we can formally name the first version incubator-0.9.0 to indicate
> the incubator status as well, and use subversion like rc1, rc2, etc, before
> moving the artifacts to the final release SVN URL.
>
> For incubator-0.9.0-rc1, the package of source code openwhisk in the dev
> SVN URL is named after openwhisk-apigateway-incubator-0.9.0-sources.tar.gz
> under the folder of apache-openwhisk-incubator-0.9.0-rc1.
>
> Shall we include the name "incubator" as part of the version name? Or it
> does not sound attractive.
>
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182 <(919)%20254-7182>
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=4205+S+Miami+Blvd&entry=gmail&source=g>
> (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
>
> -----James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> From: James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com>
> Date: 06/20/2018 01:17PM
> Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
>
> 0.9 makes sense to me.
>
> Something to think about it - what would constitute a 1.0 release? Whilst
> the platform is still evolving rapidly, it has been in production on
> multiple providers for over 12 months. What things would we like to tick
> off before reaching this stage?
>
> On 20 June 2018 at 17:38, Michele Sciabarra <op...@sciabarra.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree with 0.9.0
> >
> > --
> > Michele Sciabarra
> > openwhisk@sciabarra.com
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:37 PM, Michele Sciabarra wrote:
> > > I agree with 0.9.0.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Michele Sciabarra
> > > michele@sciabarra.com
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:31 PM, Rob Allen wrote:
> > > > On 20 Jun 2018, at 16:24, Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Can we go with 0.9.0?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > 0.9.0 is fine with me.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Rob
> > > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> James Thomas
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Ying Chun Guo <gu...@cn.ibm.com>.
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
I went through the check list. I think it's good for the first release.
I'm looking forward to it. Thanks Vincent for the work.
Best regards
Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
-----"Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com>
Date: 06/21/2018 05:16AM
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Hi everyone,
This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
List of JIRA ticket(s) resolved for this release can be found at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-213.
To learn more about Apache OpenWhisk, please visit https://openwhisk.apache.org/.
This release comprises of source code distribution only. There are totally 13 OpenWhisk projects within this release. The artifacts were built from the following Git commit IDs:
* openwhisk: 071d841, Make test-instances of Exec depend on the loaded manifest.
* openwhisk-client-go: 1e50522, Add the DISCLAIMER file for Apache incubator project
* openwhisk-cli: 461f94f, add OS and CPU architecture to user agent header
* openwhisk-catalog: 517341d, Add the DISCLAIMER file for Apache incubator project
* openwhisk-wskdeploy: 7620ef7, disabling export integration
* openwhisk-apigateway: 2b87366, Fix awk command in init.sh generating resolvers.conf file
* openwhisk-deploy-kube: cb9c3f5, Update runtimes for upstream changes.
* openwhisk-runtime-nodejs: 557c4bd, update nodejs 6 & 8 to latest security patch
* openwhisk-runtime-java: b20f90e, Add skip_pull_runtimes for Travis CI
* openwhisk-runtime-swift: 06c4972, update travis to push "master" tag to Docker on "master" branch merges
* openwhisk-runtime-python: a2098d9, update travis to push "master" tag to Docker on "master" branch merges
* openwhisk-runtime-php: b0834a5, Fix travis publish 72
* openwhisk-runtime-docker: 650842a, Add ActionProxyContainer tests
All the source code artifacts can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/
Each source code artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/[project name]-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/[project name]-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/[project name]-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
KEYS file is available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
[ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
Thank you very much.
Checklist for reference:
[ ] Download links are valid.
[ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
[VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Hi everyone,
This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
List of JIRA ticket(s) resolved for this release can be found at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-213.
To learn more about Apache OpenWhisk, please visit https://openwhisk.apache.org/.
This release comprises of source code distribution only. There are totally 13 OpenWhisk projects within this release. The artifacts were built from the following Git commit IDs:
* openwhisk: 071d841, Make test-instances of Exec depend on the loaded manifest.
* openwhisk-client-go: 1e50522, Add the DISCLAIMER file for Apache incubator project
* openwhisk-cli: 461f94f, add OS and CPU architecture to user agent header
* openwhisk-catalog: 517341d, Add the DISCLAIMER file for Apache incubator project
* openwhisk-wskdeploy: 7620ef7, disabling export integration
* openwhisk-apigateway: 2b87366, Fix awk command in init.sh generating resolvers.conf file
* openwhisk-deploy-kube: cb9c3f5, Update runtimes for upstream changes.
* openwhisk-runtime-nodejs: 557c4bd, update nodejs 6 & 8 to latest security patch
* openwhisk-runtime-java: b20f90e, Add skip_pull_runtimes for Travis CI
* openwhisk-runtime-swift: 06c4972, update travis to push "master" tag to Docker on "master" branch merges
* openwhisk-runtime-python: a2098d9, update travis to push "master" tag to Docker on "master" branch merges
* openwhisk-runtime-php: b0834a5, Fix travis publish 72
* openwhisk-runtime-docker: 650842a, Add ActionProxyContainer tests
All the source code artifacts can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/
Each source code artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/[project name]-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/[project name]-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/[project name]-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
KEYS file is available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
[ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
Thank you very much.
Checklist for reference:
[ ] Download links are valid.
[ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Hi Luciano,
The issue regarding the license in Spray. Here is something interesting I just found:
We actually rewrote some implementation by copying some code from spray.caching.Cache and spray.caching.SimpleLruCache.
The spray version we use is 1.3.4, which used to be license apache 2.0 with Copyright © 2011-2015 the spray project.
However, spray is superseded by Akka http later, and the copyright became Copyright (C) 2017 Lightbend Inc.
I am not sure which we shall keep.
I tend to keep the one with Copyright © 2011-2015 the spray project, because this is the version we refer to, and the copyright it used to be.
For the latest version of Akka http, replacing spray, we cannot find spray.caching.Cache and spray.caching.SimpleLruCache, any more, as the code
evolves.
What is your opinion on it? Thx.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
Date: 06/29/2018 08:36AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
We are recommending not to use MD5 anymore, so before going to IPMC please
delete that.
The source tar file extracts to incubator-openwhisk without the version
info, which might be overwritten by next release.
Most of the ansible files do not have the full Apache License header, but
something like a two-liner version of it, is this acceptable?
Also, could you please check the proper info/copyright for the Spray
dependency, the link provided on the license says:
Copyright © 2011-2015 the spray project <http://spray.io>
But the openwhisky license file has copyright info like:
Copyright (C) 2017 Lightbend Inc. <http://www.lightbend.com/>
Also, we recommend that source distributions have no binary files, and this
seem to have a gradle related jar bundled together.
I am +0, but most of the items above are issues that may come up when you
reach IPMC, so be prepared to have an answer for them.
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:27 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk
> 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module.
>
> List of JIRA ticket(s) resolved for this release can be found at
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-213.
>
> To learn more about Apache OpenWhisk, please visit
> https://openwhisk.apache.org/.
>
> This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one
> module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git
> commit ID:
> * openwhisk: 76dadd2, Bump gradle and scoverage version
>
> The source code artifacts can be found at:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
>
> The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
>
> The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
>
> The signature of this artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
>
> KEYS file is available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
>
> The documentation can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/doc/INSTALL.md
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> [ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ ] Download links are valid.
> [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
> [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United
> States
>
>
--
Luciano Resende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Can we use the current key for the release of 0.9.0, and change the key later?
OpenWhisk looks fine so far regarding the release process. If we resign it, we have to re-run the vote.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
Date: 06/29/2018 11:11AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 7:29 AM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> This is the key, which is used by the Travis job. The private key is
> encrypted in the repo of incubator-openwhisk-release.
>
> For further releases, what email and use id can we use? Do we have them
> handy somewhere? @Bertrand, do you have suggestions?
>
What we recommend is to use the release manager personal key for signing
the release, he would usually have his own apache account info for
e-mail/id.
--
Luciano Resende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 7:29 AM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> This is the key, which is used by the Travis job. The private key is
> encrypted in the repo of incubator-openwhisk-release.
>
> For further releases, what email and use id can we use? Do we have them
> handy somewhere? @Bertrand, do you have suggestions?
>
What we recommend is to use the release manager personal key for signing
the release, he would usually have his own apache account info for
e-mail/id.
--
Luciano Resende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>.
Can we upload a key to the PGP Global Directory and verify it?
-r
> On Jun 29, 2018, at 10:28 AM, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> This is the key, which is used by the Travis job. The private key is encrypted in the repo of incubator-openwhisk-release.
>
> For further releases, what email and use id can we use? Do we have them handy somewhere? @Bertrand, do you have suggestions?
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
>
> -----Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> From: Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>
> Date: 06/29/2018 08:04AM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
>
> As Bertrand wrote:
>
> gpg: Signature made Mon Jun 25 23:11:21 2018 CEST using RSA key ID 22CC20CC
>> gpg: Good signature from "OpenWhisk Release Bot (Release of OpenWhisk)
>> <ap...@gmail.com>" [unknown]
>>
>
> The key does not appear to be verified. Further can we not use an @
> apache.org email address vs this gmail id (who owns that)?
>
> -r
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
This is the key, which is used by the Travis job. The private key is encrypted in the repo of incubator-openwhisk-release.
For further releases, what email and use id can we use? Do we have them handy somewhere? @Bertrand, do you have suggestions?
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>
Date: 06/29/2018 08:04AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
As Bertrand wrote:
gpg: Signature made Mon Jun 25 23:11:21 2018 CEST using RSA key ID 22CC20CC
> gpg: Good signature from "OpenWhisk Release Bot (Release of OpenWhisk)
> <ap...@gmail.com>" [unknown]
>
The key does not appear to be verified. Further can we not use an @
apache.org email address vs this gmail id (who owns that)?
-r
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>.
As Bertrand wrote:
gpg: Signature made Mon Jun 25 23:11:21 2018 CEST using RSA key ID 22CC20CC
> gpg: Good signature from "OpenWhisk Release Bot (Release of OpenWhisk)
> <ap...@gmail.com>" [unknown]
>
The key does not appear to be verified. Further can we not use an @
apache.org email address vs this gmail id (who owns that)?
-r
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
I vote +1
Checklist:
- [x] Download links are valid.
- [x] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
- [x] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
- [x] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
- [x] All files have license headers if necessary.
$ python ../apache/incubator-openwhisk-utilities/scancode/scanCode.py
--config ../apache/incubator-openwhisk-utilities/scancode/ASF-Release.cfg
incubator-openwhisk/
Reading configuration file
[/dev/whisk/git/apache/incubator-openwhisk-utilities/scancode/ASF-Release.cfg]...
Scanning files starting at [incubator-openwhisk/]...
All checks passed.
- [x] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Only one jar found in
`incubator-openwhisk/gradle/wrapper/gradle-wrapper.jar`
- [x] Build from source via `./gradlew distDocker`
- [x] Deploy via ansible
$ ansible-playbook -i environments/local setup.yml
$ ansible-playbook -i environments/local couchdb.yml
$ ansible-playbook -i environments/local initdb.yml
$ ansible-playbook -i environments/local wipe.yml
$ ansible-playbook -i environments/local openwhisk.yml
- [x] Run a serverless function
$ wsk property set --apihost 172.17.0.1 --auth $(cat
ansible/files/auth.guest)
ok: whisk auth set. Run 'wsk property get --auth' to see the new value.
ok: whisk API host set to 172.17.0.1
$ echo 'const main=()=>{return {body:"Hello Apache!"}}' >hello.js
$ wsk -i action update hello hello.js
ok: updated action hello
$ wsk -i action invoke hello -r
{
"body": "Hello Apache!"
}
Vincent,
Similar findings as Bertrand pointed out, let's open issues in release repo
to track, should be addressed in following releases going forward.
About private key for signature you can store it in the private svn
repository that only OpenWhisk PPMC have access.
-cs
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 11:16 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 11:27 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > ...This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk
> 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module....
>
> +1 for the release of openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
> with SHA512()=
> 26d19d92ef4b4cf14f42fc0d425faaeb914690fcafb3dce431ea36e215c5da60ce8aad68324fdbf8a9d6e703e077923795403b80927e31feff0a21cd26da7b49
>
> Thank you Vincent and team, great work!
>
> Here's what I checked:
>
> -Signatures and digests match
> -LICENSE.txt NOTICE.txt DISCLAIMER.txt look good to me.
> -File header checks pass using the scancode tool from
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-utilities
> -build with /gradlew distDocker works (with a local Docker setup)
> -Filenames are ok
> -I don't see binary files in the release archive which is good, except
> for ./gradle/wrapper/gradle-wrapper.jar which I think is acceptable -
> but its digest should be kept track of, maybe in a jira ticket so
> people can validate it if they want.
>
> And I have a few comments that do not block the release but need to be
> taken care of eventually, IMO (some carried over from the previous
> canceled vote):
>
> 0) Could you move the files found under
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/
> that are not part of this release to a different subfolder? For
> clarity.
>
> 1) The .scala code files are in whisk.* packages, that should be
> org.apache.openwhisk.* for an Apache project.
>
> 2) There's an RSA private key in the source archive, if it's for
> testing purposes it should be clearly identified as such (ideally
> named test- something) to reassure people that it's not problematic to
> distribute it (./ansible/roles/nginx/files/openwhisk-server-key.pem).
>
> 3) The signature matches but the key is
>
> gpg: Signature made Mon Jun 25 23:11:21 2018 CEST using RSA key ID 22CC20CC
> gpg: Good signature from "OpenWhisk Release Bot (Release of OpenWhisk)
> <ap...@gmail.com>" [unknown]
>
> Is that "release bot" key secure, and who owns it?
>
> 4) The ansible setup is apparently hardcoded with 172.17.0.1 as the
> Docker host and requires a fairly specific initial setup on the host,
> I got a few errors and gave up - not a blocker for the release, but
> there's probably room for improvement either in the setup or in
> specifying a clear starting point like a specific host version, or
> Docker image or Vagrant box.
>
> 7) INSTALL.md says "Stay under the directory of incubator-openwhisk"
> but I needed to "cd ansible" first.
>
> -Bertrand (OpenWhisk incubation mentor)
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 11:27 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> ...This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module....
+1 for the release of openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
with SHA512()= 26d19d92ef4b4cf14f42fc0d425faaeb914690fcafb3dce431ea36e215c5da60ce8aad68324fdbf8a9d6e703e077923795403b80927e31feff0a21cd26da7b49
Thank you Vincent and team, great work!
Here's what I checked:
-Signatures and digests match
-LICENSE.txt NOTICE.txt DISCLAIMER.txt look good to me.
-File header checks pass using the scancode tool from
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-utilities
-build with /gradlew distDocker works (with a local Docker setup)
-Filenames are ok
-I don't see binary files in the release archive which is good, except
for ./gradle/wrapper/gradle-wrapper.jar which I think is acceptable -
but its digest should be kept track of, maybe in a jira ticket so
people can validate it if they want.
And I have a few comments that do not block the release but need to be
taken care of eventually, IMO (some carried over from the previous
canceled vote):
0) Could you move the files found under
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/
that are not part of this release to a different subfolder? For
clarity.
1) The .scala code files are in whisk.* packages, that should be
org.apache.openwhisk.* for an Apache project.
2) There's an RSA private key in the source archive, if it's for
testing purposes it should be clearly identified as such (ideally
named test- something) to reassure people that it's not problematic to
distribute it (./ansible/roles/nginx/files/openwhisk-server-key.pem).
3) The signature matches but the key is
gpg: Signature made Mon Jun 25 23:11:21 2018 CEST using RSA key ID 22CC20CC
gpg: Good signature from "OpenWhisk Release Bot (Release of OpenWhisk)
<ap...@gmail.com>" [unknown]
Is that "release bot" key secure, and who owns it?
4) The ansible setup is apparently hardcoded with 172.17.0.1 as the
Docker host and requires a fairly specific initial setup on the host,
I got a few errors and gave up - not a blocker for the release, but
there's probably room for improvement either in the setup or in
specifying a clear starting point like a specific host version, or
Docker image or Vagrant box.
7) INSTALL.md says "Stay under the directory of incubator-openwhisk"
but I needed to "cd ansible" first.
-Bertrand (OpenWhisk incubation mentor)
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Hi Luciano,
We will remove the md5.
Version number will be added.
We have a comprehensive definition about which kind of source files include long or short version of license header.
Please refer to this link: https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/blob/master/docs/license_compliance.md. Ansible files will be equipped with short version of license header. Both full and short versions are acceptable.
We are now doubling confirming the copyright of spray caching, and figuring out the gradle jar issue.
Thanks for the comments.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
Date: 06/29/2018 08:36AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
We are recommending not to use MD5 anymore, so before going to IPMC please
delete that.
The source tar file extracts to incubator-openwhisk without the version
info, which might be overwritten by next release.
Most of the ansible files do not have the full Apache License header, but
something like a two-liner version of it, is this acceptable?
Also, could you please check the proper info/copyright for the Spray
dependency, the link provided on the license says:
Copyright © 2011-2015 the spray project <http://spray.io>
But the openwhisky license file has copyright info like:
Copyright (C) 2017 Lightbend Inc. <http://www.lightbend.com/>
Also, we recommend that source distributions have no binary files, and this
seem to have a gradle related jar bundled together.
I am +0, but most of the items above are issues that may come up when you
reach IPMC, so be prepared to have an answer for them.
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:27 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk
> 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module.
>
> List of JIRA ticket(s) resolved for this release can be found at
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-213.
>
> To learn more about Apache OpenWhisk, please visit
> https://openwhisk.apache.org/.
>
> This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one
> module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git
> commit ID:
> * openwhisk: 76dadd2, Bump gradle and scoverage version
>
> The source code artifacts can be found at:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
>
> The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
>
> The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
>
> The signature of this artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
>
> KEYS file is available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
>
> The documentation can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/doc/INSTALL.md
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> [ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ ] Download links are valid.
> [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
> [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United
> States
>
>
--
Luciano Resende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Thank everybody for your active vote.
We have received enough votes to approve the release in this mail thread, but I realized that we still need to resolve the license issue for the spray caching and remove the gradle wrapper. I have made these changes on openwhisk repo, and will propose another candidate RC2 for folks to vote.
In addition, I will fix the some issues for the documentation as well. You can find them with the tag "release" at this link https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/issues.
This mail thread is closed. I will open another mail thread to vote openwhisk rc2. Stay tuned.
Thank you for your votes.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----"Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com>
Date: 06/29/2018 03:11PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Correction:
We removed the gradle wrapper in the package. Instead, users need to download it and place it in the correct folder to build the source code.
Regarding the copyright, we will remove the one for lightbend, and keep the one for spray project.
Hi Luciano,
We will remove the md5.
Version number will be added.
We have a comprehensive definition about which kind of source files include long or short version of license header.
Please refer to this link: https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/blob/master/docs/license_compliance.md. Ansible files will be equipped with short version of license header. Both full and short versions are acceptable.
OpenWhisk is a scala-based project, which relies on gradle build. The gradle jar is included for build purpose only. We were investigating whether we should include this gradle jar. We did not find any official documents regarding that, but we see many other scal-based Apache project released their source code with the gradle jar, since it is used for the basic build need. For example, apache beam, available https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/2.5.0/.
So we decided to release it together with the source code.
We are now doubling confirming the copyright of spray caching.
Thanks for the comments.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
Date: 06/29/2018 08:36AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
We are recommending not to use MD5 anymore, so before going to IPMC please
delete that.
The source tar file extracts to incubator-openwhisk without the version
info, which might be overwritten by next release.
Most of the ansible files do not have the full Apache License header, but
something like a two-liner version of it, is this acceptable?
Also, could you please check the proper info/copyright for the Spray
dependency, the link provided on the license says:
Copyright © 2011-2015 the spray project <http://spray.io>
But the openwhisky license file has copyright info like:
Copyright (C) 2017 Lightbend Inc. <http://www.lightbend.com/>
Also, we recommend that source distributions have no binary files, and this
seem to have a gradle related jar bundled together.
I am +0, but most of the items above are issues that may come up when you
reach IPMC, so be prepared to have an answer for them.
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:27 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk
> 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module.
>
> List of JIRA ticket(s) resolved for this release can be found at
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-213.
>
> To learn more about Apache OpenWhisk, please visit
> https://openwhisk.apache.org/.
>
> This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one
> module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git
> commit ID:
> * openwhisk: 76dadd2, Bump gradle and scoverage version
>
> The source code artifacts can be found at:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
>
> The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
>
> The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
>
> The signature of this artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
>
> KEYS file is available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
>
> The documentation can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/doc/INSTALL.md
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> [ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ ] Download links are valid.
> [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
> [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United
> States
>
>
--
Luciano Resende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Correction:
We removed the gradle wrapper in the package. Instead, users need to download it and place it in the correct folder to build the source code.
Regarding the copyright, we will remove the one for lightbend, and keep the one for spray project.
Hi Luciano,
We will remove the md5.
Version number will be added.
We have a comprehensive definition about which kind of source files include long or short version of license header.
Please refer to this link: https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/blob/master/docs/license_compliance.md. Ansible files will be equipped with short version of license header. Both full and short versions are acceptable.
OpenWhisk is a scala-based project, which relies on gradle build. The gradle jar is included for build purpose only. We were investigating whether we should include this gradle jar. We did not find any official documents regarding that, but we see many other scal-based Apache project released their source code with the gradle jar, since it is used for the basic build need. For example, apache beam, available https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/2.5.0/.
So we decided to release it together with the source code.
We are now doubling confirming the copyright of spray caching.
Thanks for the comments.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>
Date: 06/29/2018 08:36AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
We are recommending not to use MD5 anymore, so before going to IPMC please
delete that.
The source tar file extracts to incubator-openwhisk without the version
info, which might be overwritten by next release.
Most of the ansible files do not have the full Apache License header, but
something like a two-liner version of it, is this acceptable?
Also, could you please check the proper info/copyright for the Spray
dependency, the link provided on the license says:
Copyright © 2011-2015 the spray project <http://spray.io>
But the openwhisky license file has copyright info like:
Copyright (C) 2017 Lightbend Inc. <http://www.lightbend.com/>
Also, we recommend that source distributions have no binary files, and this
seem to have a gradle related jar bundled together.
I am +0, but most of the items above are issues that may come up when you
reach IPMC, so be prepared to have an answer for them.
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:27 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk
> 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module.
>
> List of JIRA ticket(s) resolved for this release can be found at
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-213.
>
> To learn more about Apache OpenWhisk, please visit
> https://openwhisk.apache.org/.
>
> This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one
> module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git
> commit ID:
> * openwhisk: 76dadd2, Bump gradle and scoverage version
>
> The source code artifacts can be found at:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
>
> The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
>
> The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
>
> The signature of this artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
>
> KEYS file is available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
>
> The documentation can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/doc/INSTALL.md
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> [ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ ] Download links are valid.
> [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
> [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United
> States
>
>
--
Luciano Resende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
We are recommending not to use MD5 anymore, so before going to IPMC please
delete that.
The source tar file extracts to incubator-openwhisk without the version
info, which might be overwritten by next release.
Most of the ansible files do not have the full Apache License header, but
something like a two-liner version of it, is this acceptable?
Also, could you please check the proper info/copyright for the Spray
dependency, the link provided on the license says:
Copyright © 2011-2015 the spray project <http://spray.io>
But the openwhisky license file has copyright info like:
Copyright (C) 2017 Lightbend Inc. <http://www.lightbend.com/>
Also, we recommend that source distributions have no binary files, and this
seem to have a gradle related jar bundled together.
I am +0, but most of the items above are issues that may come up when you
reach IPMC, so be prepared to have an answer for them.
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:27 PM Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk
> 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module.
>
> List of JIRA ticket(s) resolved for this release can be found at
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-213.
>
> To learn more about Apache OpenWhisk, please visit
> https://openwhisk.apache.org/.
>
> This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one
> module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git
> commit ID:
> * openwhisk: 76dadd2, Bump gradle and scoverage version
>
> The source code artifacts can be found at:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
>
> The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
>
> The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
>
> The signature of this artifact can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
>
> KEYS file is available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
>
> The documentation can be found via:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/doc/INSTALL.md
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> [ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ ] Download links are valid.
> [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
> [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United
> States
>
>
--
Luciano Resende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com>.
+1 on this release.
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[0] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid. (did not verify on this point
iteration)
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[X] All files have license headers if necessary.
[X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
On 28 June 2018 at 09:03, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:22 AM Markus Thoemmes
> <ma...@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> ...
> > - [✓] No compiled archives bundled in source archive. (Other than
> gradlew.jar)
> ....
> > Is there a procedure to verify the last point? I quickly did a find for
> jar files and a find for executable files...
>
> I also use find + file to look for binaries, something like
>
> find . -type f | xargs -n10 file | grep -v ASCII
>
> -Bertrand
>
--
Regards,
James Thomas
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:22 AM Markus Thoemmes
<ma...@de.ibm.com> wrote:
...
> - [✓] No compiled archives bundled in source archive. (Other than gradlew.jar)
....
> Is there a procedure to verify the last point? I quickly did a find for jar files and a find for executable files...
I also use find + file to look for binaries, something like
find . -type f | xargs -n10 file | grep -v ASCII
-Bertrand
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Markus Thoemmes <ma...@de.ibm.com>.
Hey,
+1 on releasing this!
Checklist for reference:
- [✓] Download links are valid.
- [✓] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
- [✓] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
- [✓] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
- [✓] All files have license headers if necessary. (Scanning files succeeded with "All checks passed.")
- [✓] No compiled archives bundled in source archive. (Other than gradlew.jar)
Some feedback on the readme: It's great in general! We could improve some bits, to make it easier for a "reviewer" to verify all the steps. (For example: Fully qualify the commands with the artifact rather than adding a placeholder, add "wget" commands to download the entities, add the commands needed for the codescan).
Is there a procedure to verify the last point? I quickly did a find for jar files and a find for executable files.
Thanks for doing this!
Cheers,
-m
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Dominic Kim <st...@gmail.com>.
Hey~ Since I am on the biz trip, I am a bit late.
Definitely +1 on this.
Great work~! Vincent.
I tried all things based on the guide and found all things correct except
one small thing.
Regarding the following part in the guide, I think those commands should
run under "incubator-openwhisk/ansible" directory not under
"incubator-openwhisk".
## Deploy OpenWhisk
Stay under the directory of incubator-openwhisk, and run the following
ansible scripts one by one:
```
$ ansible-playbook -i environments/local setup.yml
$ ansible-playbook -i environments/local prereq.yml
$ ansible-playbook -i environments/local couchdb.yml
$ ansible-playbook -i environments/local initdb.yml
$ ansible-playbook -i environments/local wipe.yml
$ ansible-playbook -i environments/local apigateway.yml
$ ansible-playbook -i environments/local openwhisk.yml
$ ansible-playbook -i environments/local postdeploy.yml
```
Checklist for reference:
- [✓] Download links are valid.
- [✓] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
- [✓] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
- [✓] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
- [✓] All files have license headers if necessary. (Scanning files
succeeded with "All checks passed.")
Thanks
Regards
Dominic
2018-06-28 5:38 GMT+08:00 Brendan McAdams <bm...@redhat.com>:
> +1
>
>
> > [✓] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
>
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> > [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
> >
> > Checklist for reference:
> > [✓] Download links are valid.
> > [✓] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
>
> *I wasn’t able to get the mit pgpkeys server to respond to a request for
> the key (either timed or errored out), per the Apache “verifying release”
> instructions <https://httpd.apache.org/dev/verification.html>, but the
> keys
> provided directly match up in a gpg verify.*
>
> > [✓] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
> release.
>
> [✓] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
>
> [✓] All files have license headers if necessary.
>
> *I used the same process as Carlos did in his reply, using
> incubator-openwhisk-utilities to verify license headers. “All checks
> passed”. *
>
> > [✓] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> *Only exception is the gradle-wrapper.jar, which Carlos noted. I’m assuming
> there’s no redistribution issue with including that.*
>
> -b
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Brendan McAdams <bm...@redhat.com>.
+1
> [✓] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
[ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [✓] Download links are valid.
> [✓] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
*I wasn’t able to get the mit pgpkeys server to respond to a request for
the key (either timed or errored out), per the Apache “verifying release”
instructions <https://httpd.apache.org/dev/verification.html>, but the keys
provided directly match up in a gpg verify.*
> [✓] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[✓] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[✓] All files have license headers if necessary.
*I used the same process as Carlos did in his reply, using
incubator-openwhisk-utilities to verify license headers. “All checks
passed”. *
> [✓] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
*Only exception is the gradle-wrapper.jar, which Carlos noted. I’m assuming
there’s no redistribution issue with including that.*
-b
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main
OpenWhisk module
Posted by Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>.
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[X] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[X] All files have license headers if necessary.
[X] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:55 AM, Ying Chun Guo <gu...@cn.ibm.com> wrote:
> I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [X] Download links are valid.
> [O] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
> [X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [X] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [X] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
>
> Best regards
> Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
>
>
> -----"Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> From: "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com>
> Date: 07/04/2018 02:55AM
> Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main
> OpenWhisk module
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk
> 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module.
>
> We have resolved all the issues regarding the dependency's license, gradle
> wrapper, some documentation issues, etc, based on we discussed during last
> voting mail thread for rc1.
>
> This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one
> module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git
> commit ID:
> * openwhisk: b1476b9, add until for all ansible retries (#3806)
>
> The source code artifacts can be found at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
>
> The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
>
> The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
>
> The signature of this artifact can be found via:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.
> 0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
>
> KEYS file is available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
>
> The documentation can be found via:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/
> apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/doc/INSTALL.md
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> rc2.
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> [ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ ] Download links are valid.
> [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
> [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United
> States
>
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main
OpenWhisk module
Posted by James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com>.
I also vote +1 to release OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2 module.
Checklist for reference:
[ X ] Download links are valid. (Please disregard the md5 link, since we do
not need it)
[ X ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ X ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[ X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ X ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
On 9 July 2018 at 16:37, Justin Halsall <ju...@juice10.com> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I also vote +1 to release OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2 module.
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ X ] Download links are valid. (Please disregard the md5 link, since we
> do not need it)
> [ X ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ X ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
> release.
> [ X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ X ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> Cheers,
> Justin Halsall
--
Regards,
James Thomas
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main
OpenWhisk module
Posted by Justin Halsall <ju...@juice10.com>.
Hello everyone,
I also vote +1 to release OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2 module.
Checklist for reference:
[ X ] Download links are valid. (Please disregard the md5 link, since we do not need it)
[ X ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ X ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[ X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ X ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Cheers,
Justin Halsall
[VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by James W Dubee <jw...@us.ibm.com>.
Hello all,
I vote +1 as well to release OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2 module
Checklist for reference:
[ X ] Download links are valid.(Please disregard the md5 link, since we do
not need it)
[ X ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ X ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
release.
[ X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ X ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Regards,
James Dubee
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@apache.org>.
I vote:
+1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[ X ] Download links are valid.
[ X ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ X ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
release.
[ X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ X ] All files have license headers if necessary. (assuming I ran
scancode correctly...see below).
[ X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
In regard to Dave's comments:
> (2) I think it would be better to include the exact commands for running
> scancode to verify that all files have license headers instead of
> referencing the scancode tutorial. For example, I am not 100% positive if
> by following the tutorial (see shell transcript below) really checked the
> right rules or if I needed to invoke scancode with a specific configuration
> file.
The release repo. actually informs on how compliance checks are automated and references the configuration files used:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/blob/master/docs/license_compliance.md#scancode
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk
module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Thank Dave for the vote and comments. I am updating the doc now to make it more straightforward.
I vote +1 as well to release OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2 module
Checklist for reference:
[ X ] Download links are valid.(Please disregard the md5 link, since we do not need it)
[ X ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ X ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[ X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ X ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----"David P Grove" <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: "David P Grove" <gr...@us.ibm.com>
Date: 07/03/2018 06:22PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
I vote
+1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[ X ] Download links are valid.
[ X ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ X ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
release.
[ X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ X ] All files have license headers if necessary. (assuming I ran
scancode correctly...see below).
[ X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
I also verified that the release built on MacOS and that I could deploy it
an invoke the echo message per the release documentation.
Two very small things that could be improved in the release documentation
file. I do not see either of these as release blockers (thus the +1 vote).
(1) In the "Run OpenWhisk" section, it uses both `wsk` and `bin/wsk`. We
should probably either say `$OPENWHISK_HOME/bin/wsk` uniformly or say that
we assume that the user has put the wsk CLI on their path.
(2) I think it would be better to include the exact commands for running
scancode to verify that all files have license headers instead of
referencing the scancode tutorial. For example, I am not 100% positive if
by following the tutorial (see shell transcript below) really checked the
right rules or if I needed to invoke scancode with a specific configuration
file.
--dave
daves-mbp-3:incubator-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating dgrove$ python
~/code/openwhisk/incubator-openwhisk-utilities/scancode/scanCode.py .
Reading configuration file
[/Users/dgrove/code/openwhisk/incubator-openwhisk-utilities/scancode/scanCode.cfg]...
Scanning files starting at [.]...
All checks passed.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk
module
Posted by David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com>.
I vote
+1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[ X ] Download links are valid.
[ X ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ X ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
release.
[ X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ X ] All files have license headers if necessary. (assuming I ran
scancode correctly...see below).
[ X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
I also verified that the release built on MacOS and that I could deploy it
an invoke the echo message per the release documentation.
Two very small things that could be improved in the release documentation
file. I do not see either of these as release blockers (thus the +1 vote).
(1) In the "Run OpenWhisk" section, it uses both `wsk` and `bin/wsk`. We
should probably either say `$OPENWHISK_HOME/bin/wsk` uniformly or say that
we assume that the user has put the wsk CLI on their path.
(2) I think it would be better to include the exact commands for running
scancode to verify that all files have license headers instead of
referencing the scancode tutorial. For example, I am not 100% positive if
by following the tutorial (see shell transcript below) really checked the
right rules or if I needed to invoke scancode with a specific configuration
file.
--dave
daves-mbp-3:incubator-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating dgrove$ python
~/code/openwhisk/incubator-openwhisk-utilities/scancode/scanCode.py .
Reading configuration file
[/Users/dgrove/code/openwhisk/incubator-openwhisk-utilities/scancode/scanCode.cfg]...
Scanning files starting at [.]...
All checks passed.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk
module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
My mistake. I should have removed the link to md5, since we do not generate md5 any more.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>
Date: 07/03/2018 03:04PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
This was removed:
> On Jul 3, 2018, at 2:55 PM, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>
> The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5 <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main
OpenWhisk module
Posted by Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>.
This was removed:
> On Jul 3, 2018, at 2:55 PM, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>
> The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5 <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk
module
Posted by Ying Chun Guo <gu...@cn.ibm.com>.
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[O] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[X] All files have license headers if necessary.
[X] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Best regards
Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
-----"Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com>
Date: 07/04/2018 02:55AM
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
Hi everyone,
This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module.
We have resolved all the issues regarding the dependency's license, gradle wrapper, some documentation issues, etc, based on we discussed during last voting mail thread for rc1.
This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git commit ID:
* openwhisk: b1476b9, add until for all ansible retries (#3806)
The source code artifacts can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
The signature of this artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
KEYS file is available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
The documentation can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/doc/INSTALL.md
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2.
The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
[ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
Checklist for reference:
[ ] Download links are valid.
[ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Thank you very much.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by lu...@gmail.com,
lu...@gmail.com.
I vote +1.
[VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Hi everyone,
This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module.
We have resolved all the issues regarding the dependency's license, gradle wrapper, some documentation issues, etc, based on we discussed during last voting mail thread for rc1.
This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git commit ID:
* openwhisk: b1476b9, add until for all ansible retries (#3806)
The source code artifacts can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
The signature of this artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
KEYS file is available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
The documentation can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/doc/INSTALL.md
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2.
The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
[ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
Checklist for reference:
[ ] Download links are valid.
[ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Thank you very much.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Chetan Mehrotra <ch...@gmail.com>.
+1 on the release.
Done validation on Mac
[X] Download links are valid.
[0] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid. (did not verify on this point
iteration)
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo. -
Done via running scanCode
[X] All files have license headers if necessary.
[X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive
As mentioned by others would be helpful to make steps more precise
where commands can be copied verbatim (like wget to download the
released artifacts)
Thanks for putting this altogether and automating the process! Would
be of great help in future
Chetan Mehrotra
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 6:38 PM, David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> +1 on the release.
>
> I verified that sources built on MacOS and checked the following items:
>
> [ X ] Download links are valid.
> [ X ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ X ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
> release.
> [ X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> --dave
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com>.
+1 on the release.
I verified that sources built on MacOS and checked the following items:
[ X ] Download links are valid.
[ X ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ X ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
release.
[ X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
--dave
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@apache.org>.
The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
[X] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
Checklist for reference:
[X] Download links are valid.
[0] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid. (did not verify on this point iteration)
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[X] All files have license headers if necessary.
[X ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
On 2018/06/25 21:15:01, "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module.
>
> List of JIRA ticket(s) resolved for this release can be found at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-213.
>
> To learn more about Apache OpenWhisk, please visit https://openwhisk.apache.org/.
>
> This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git commit ID:
> * openwhisk: 76dadd2, Bump gradle and scoverage version
>
> The source code artifacts can be found at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
>
> The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
>
> The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
>
> The signature of this artifact can be found via:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
>
> KEYS file is available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
>
> The documentation can be found via:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/doc/INSTALL.md
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> [ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ ] Download links are valid.
> [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
> [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Ying Chun Guo <gu...@cn.ibm.com>.
I vote +1 for Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
Checklist:
[X] Download links are valid.
[X] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[X] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[X] All files have license headers if necessary.
[X] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Best regards
Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
-----"Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com>
Date: 06/26/2018 05:27AM
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Hi everyone,
This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module.
List of JIRA ticket(s) resolved for this release can be found at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-213.
To learn more about Apache OpenWhisk, please visit https://openwhisk.apache.org/.
This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git commit ID:
* openwhisk: 76dadd2, Bump gradle and scoverage version
The source code artifacts can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
The signature of this artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
KEYS file is available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
The documentation can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/doc/INSTALL.md
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
[ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
Checklist for reference:
[ ] Download links are valid.
[ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Thank you very much.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
[VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Hi everyone,
This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating: main OpenWhisk module.
List of JIRA ticket(s) resolved for this release can be found at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-213.
To learn more about Apache OpenWhisk, please visit https://openwhisk.apache.org/.
This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git commit ID:
* openwhisk: 76dadd2, Bump gradle and scoverage version
The source code artifacts can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
The MD5 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.md5
The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
The signature of this artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
KEYS file is available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
The documentation can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc1/doc/INSTALL.md
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating.
The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
[ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
Checklist for reference:
[ ] Download links are valid.
[ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Thank you very much.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2:
main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Dragos Dascalita Haut <dd...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
"...Please count my vote as well (binding)..."
Same for me.
________________________________
From: Matt Rutkowski <mr...@apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2018 4:11:23 PM
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
Please count my vote as well (binding)
-mr
On 2018/07/10 20:35:14, "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Dear IPMC members,
>
> This vote has passed with 6 +1 votes (bindings), 2 +1 votes (non-binding) and no 0 or -1 votes.
>
> +1 (binding), David Grove
> +1 (binding), James Dubee
> +1 (binding), James Thomas
> +1 (binding), Rodric Rabbah
> +1 (binding), Vincent Hou
> +1 (binding), Ying Chun Guo
>
>
> +1 (non-binding), Justin Halsall
> +1 (non-binding), Priti Desai
>
> Please vote on the OpenWhisk main module to be released as a candidate for OpenWhisk 0.9.0. Thank you very much.
>
> We are currently using the tool called openwhisk-release(https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fincubator-openwhisk-release&data=02%7C01%7Cddascal%40adobe.com%7C3cc28d07d7f14826c89308d5e6ba75e2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636668610870355699&sdata=5pwzAsk6Yc9Pu1h7m99whpi4%2BrWyng0mnAuAkIYIPUs%3D&reserved=0) to release all the modules of OpenWhisk. The instruction for release managers can be found at: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fincubator-openwhisk-release%2Fblob%2Fmaster%2Fdocs%2Frelease_instructions.md&data=02%7C01%7Cddascal%40adobe.com%7C3cc28d07d7f14826c89308d5e6ba75e2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636668610870355699&sdata=%2F5rxIqkFMyq%2BdhnHL6MsMj%2FcAnUF6WO7n8yAGrPFTsI%3D&reserved=0.
>
> This tool supports both manual and automated modes to package the source code, sign the artifacts and upload the artifacts into Apache SVN repositories.
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
>
> -----Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM wrote: -----
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> From: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM
> Date: 07/03/2018 02:55PM
> Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module.
>
> We have resolved all the issues regarding the dependency's license, gradle wrapper, some documentation issues, etc, based on we discussed during last voting mail thread for rc1.
>
> This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git commit ID:
> * openwhisk: b1476b9, add until for all ansible retries (#3806)
>
> The source code artifacts can be found at:
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fincubator%2Fopenwhisk%2Fapache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2%2Fopenwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz&data=02%7C01%7Cddascal%40adobe.com%7C3cc28d07d7f14826c89308d5e6ba75e2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636668610870355699&sdata=ApPSUBF4Pn4S810megnJehGCTWujGnJJCMzabe53FaM%3D&reserved=0
>
> The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fincubator%2Fopenwhisk%2Fapache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2%2Fopenwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512&data=02%7C01%7Cddascal%40adobe.com%7C3cc28d07d7f14826c89308d5e6ba75e2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636668610870355699&sdata=H9nGPnzZ%2BfNW%2Bj6PgtARielw238dQd5VQ3dfvOKKF3s%3D&reserved=0
>
> The signature of this artifact can be found via:
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fincubator%2Fopenwhisk%2Fapache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2%2Fopenwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc&data=02%7C01%7Cddascal%40adobe.com%7C3cc28d07d7f14826c89308d5e6ba75e2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636668610870365722&sdata=P8DvOZimahaRm6498Nv1yoB9IOm2oPKHmdGcMdabhcA%3D&reserved=0
>
> KEYS file is available here:
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fincubator%2Fopenwhisk%2FKEYS&data=02%7C01%7Cddascal%40adobe.com%7C3cc28d07d7f14826c89308d5e6ba75e2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636668610870365722&sdata=6%2FXt5EUl168%2B%2FAkn7pfP9gH5OvpQlwDXjQfNooFt0FY%3D&reserved=0
>
> The documentation can be found via:
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fincubator%2Fopenwhisk%2Fapache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2%2Fdoc%2FINSTALL.md&data=02%7C01%7Cddascal%40adobe.com%7C3cc28d07d7f14826c89308d5e6ba75e2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636668610870365722&sdata=25P%2Fr8FxVI51aXrOXL8oub1p31l8wxqiO4XB%2FfQ%2ForY%3D&reserved=0
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2.
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> [ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ ] Download links are valid.
> [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
> [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
>
>
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@apache.org>.
Please count my vote as well (binding)
-mr
On 2018/07/10 20:35:14, "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Dear IPMC members,
>
> This vote has passed with 6 +1 votes (bindings), 2 +1 votes (non-binding) and no 0 or -1 votes.
>
> +1 (binding), David Grove
> +1 (binding), James Dubee
> +1 (binding), James Thomas
> +1 (binding), Rodric Rabbah
> +1 (binding), Vincent Hou
> +1 (binding), Ying Chun Guo
>
>
> +1 (non-binding), Justin Halsall
> +1 (non-binding), Priti Desai
>
> Please vote on the OpenWhisk main module to be released as a candidate for OpenWhisk 0.9.0. Thank you very much.
>
> We are currently using the tool called openwhisk-release(https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release) to release all the modules of OpenWhisk. The instruction for release managers can be found at: https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/blob/master/docs/release_instructions.md.
>
> This tool supports both manual and automated modes to package the source code, sign the artifacts and upload the artifacts into Apache SVN repositories.
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
>
> -----Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM wrote: -----
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> From: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM
> Date: 07/03/2018 02:55PM
> Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module.
>
> We have resolved all the issues regarding the dependency's license, gradle wrapper, some documentation issues, etc, based on we discussed during last voting mail thread for rc1.
>
> This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git commit ID:
> * openwhisk: b1476b9, add until for all ansible retries (#3806)
>
> The source code artifacts can be found at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
>
> The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
>
> The signature of this artifact can be found via:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
>
> KEYS file is available here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
>
> The documentation can be found via:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/doc/INSTALL.md
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2.
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> [ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
>
> Checklist for reference:
> [ ] Download links are valid.
> [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
> [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
> [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
> [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
>
>
[RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main
OpenWhisk module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Dear IPMC members,
This vote has passed with 6 +1 votes (bindings), 2 +1 votes (non-binding) and no 0 or -1 votes.
+1 (binding), David Grove
+1 (binding), James Dubee
+1 (binding), James Thomas
+1 (binding), Rodric Rabbah
+1 (binding), Vincent Hou
+1 (binding), Ying Chun Guo
+1 (non-binding), Justin Halsall
+1 (non-binding), Priti Desai
Please vote on the OpenWhisk main module to be released as a candidate for OpenWhisk 0.9.0. Thank you very much.
We are currently using the tool called openwhisk-release(https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release) to release all the modules of OpenWhisk. The instruction for release managers can be found at: https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/blob/master/docs/release_instructions.md.
This tool supports both manual and automated modes to package the source code, sign the artifacts and upload the artifacts into Apache SVN repositories.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM
Date: 07/03/2018 02:55PM
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
Hi everyone,
This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module.
We have resolved all the issues regarding the dependency's license, gradle wrapper, some documentation issues, etc, based on we discussed during last voting mail thread for rc1.
This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git commit ID:
* openwhisk: b1476b9, add until for all ansible retries (#3806)
The source code artifacts can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
The signature of this artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
KEYS file is available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
The documentation can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/doc/INSTALL.md
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2.
The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
[ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
Checklist for reference:
[ ] Download links are valid.
[ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Thank you very much.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
[RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main
OpenWhisk module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Dear IPMC members,
This vote has passed with 6 +1 votes (bindings), 2 +1 votes (non-binding) and no 0 or -1 votes.
+1 (binding), David Grove
+1 (binding), James Dubee
+1 (binding), James Thomas
+1 (binding), Rodric Rabbah
+1 (binding), Vincent Hou
+1 (binding), Ying Chun Guo
+1 (non-binding), Justin Halsall
+1 (non-binding), Priti Desai
Please vote on the OpenWhisk main module to be released as a candidate for OpenWhisk 0.9.0. Thank you very much.
We are currently using the tool called openwhisk-release(https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release) to release all the modules of OpenWhisk. The instruction for release managers can be found at: https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/blob/master/docs/release_instructions.md.
This tool supports both manual and automated modes to package the source code, sign the artifacts and upload the artifacts into Apache SVN repositories.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM
Date: 07/03/2018 02:55PM
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
Hi everyone,
This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module.
We have resolved all the issues regarding the dependency's license, gradle wrapper, some documentation issues, etc, based on we discussed during last voting mail thread for rc1.
This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git commit ID:
* openwhisk: b1476b9, add until for all ansible retries (#3806)
The source code artifacts can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
The signature of this artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
KEYS file is available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
The documentation can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/doc/INSTALL.md
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2.
The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
[ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
Checklist for reference:
[ ] Download links are valid.
[ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Thank you very much.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main
OpenWhisk module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Plus, we have another two binding votes for OpenWhisk main module RC2.
+1 (binding), Dragos Dascalita Haut
+1 (binding), Matt Rutkowski
We have already received 8 +1 votes (bindings), 2 +1 votes (non-binding) and no 0 or -1 votes.
The vote has passed in the dev list of OpenWhisk, based on Apache voting policy.
I am closing this mail thread, and will send out another email for IPMC to vote.
Thanks.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM wrote: -----
To: general@incubator.apache.org
From: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM
Date: 07/10/2018 04:35PM
Cc: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Subject: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
Dear IPMC members,
This vote has passed with 6 +1 votes (bindings), 2 +1 votes (non-binding) and no 0 or -1 votes.
+1 (binding), David Grove
+1 (binding), James Dubee
+1 (binding), James Thomas
+1 (binding), Rodric Rabbah
+1 (binding), Vincent Hou
+1 (binding), Ying Chun Guo
+1 (non-binding), Justin Halsall
+1 (non-binding), Priti Desai
Please vote on the OpenWhisk main module to be released as a candidate for OpenWhisk 0.9.0. Thank you very much.
We are currently using the tool called openwhisk-release(https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release) to release all the modules of OpenWhisk. The instruction for release managers can be found at: https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/blob/master/docs/release_instructions.md.
This tool supports both manual and automated modes to package the source code, sign the artifacts and upload the artifacts into Apache SVN repositories.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM
Date: 07/03/2018 02:55PM
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
Hi everyone,
This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module.
We have resolved all the issues regarding the dependency's license, gradle wrapper, some documentation issues, etc, based on we discussed during last voting mail thread for rc1.
This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git commit ID:
* openwhisk: b1476b9, add until for all ansible retries (#3806)
The source code artifacts can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
The signature of this artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
KEYS file is available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
The documentation can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/doc/INSTALL.md
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2.
The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
[ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
Checklist for reference:
[ ] Download links are valid.
[ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Thank you very much.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main
OpenWhisk module
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Plus, we have another two binding votes for OpenWhisk main module RC2.
+1 (binding), Dragos Dascalita Haut
+1 (binding), Matt Rutkowski
We have already received 8 +1 votes (bindings), 2 +1 votes (non-binding) and no 0 or -1 votes.
The vote has passed in the dev list of OpenWhisk, based on Apache voting policy.
I am closing this mail thread, and will send out another email for IPMC to vote.
Thanks.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM wrote: -----
To: general@incubator.apache.org
From: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM
Date: 07/10/2018 04:35PM
Cc: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Subject: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
Dear IPMC members,
This vote has passed with 6 +1 votes (bindings), 2 +1 votes (non-binding) and no 0 or -1 votes.
+1 (binding), David Grove
+1 (binding), James Dubee
+1 (binding), James Thomas
+1 (binding), Rodric Rabbah
+1 (binding), Vincent Hou
+1 (binding), Ying Chun Guo
+1 (non-binding), Justin Halsall
+1 (non-binding), Priti Desai
Please vote on the OpenWhisk main module to be released as a candidate for OpenWhisk 0.9.0. Thank you very much.
We are currently using the tool called openwhisk-release(https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release) to release all the modules of OpenWhisk. The instruction for release managers can be found at: https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-release/blob/master/docs/release_instructions.md.
This tool supports both manual and automated modes to package the source code, sign the artifacts and upload the artifacts into Apache SVN repositories.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM
Date: 07/03/2018 02:55PM
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module
Hi everyone,
This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2: main OpenWhisk module.
We have resolved all the issues regarding the dependency's license, gradle wrapper, some documentation issues, etc, based on we discussed during last voting mail thread for rc1.
This release comprises of source code distribution only. There is one module within this release. The artifact was built from the following Git commit ID:
* openwhisk: b1476b9, add until for all ansible retries (#3806)
The source code artifacts can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
The SHA-512 checksum for each artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
The signature of this artifact can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
KEYS file is available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS
The documentation can be found via:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.9.0-incubating-rc2/doc/INSTALL.md
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating rc2.
The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
[ ] +1 Release as Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release and the reason
Checklist for reference:
[ ] Download links are valid.
[ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
[ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repo.
[ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
[ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
Thank you very much.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
So far, we can formally name the first version incubator-0.9.0 to indicate the incubator status as well, and use subversion like rc1, rc2, etc, before moving the artifacts to the final release SVN URL.
For incubator-0.9.0-rc1, the package of source code openwhisk in the dev SVN URL is named after openwhisk-apigateway-incubator-0.9.0-sources.tar.gz
under the folder of apache-openwhisk-incubator-0.9.0-rc1.
Shall we include the name "incubator" as part of the version name? Or it does not sound attractive.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com>
Date: 06/20/2018 01:17PM
Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
0.9 makes sense to me.
Something to think about it - what would constitute a 1.0 release? Whilst
the platform is still evolving rapidly, it has been in production on
multiple providers for over 12 months. What things would we like to tick
off before reaching this stage?
On 20 June 2018 at 17:38, Michele Sciabarra <op...@sciabarra.com> wrote:
> I agree with 0.9.0
>
> --
> Michele Sciabarra
> openwhisk@sciabarra.com
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:37 PM, Michele Sciabarra wrote:
> > I agree with 0.9.0.
> >
> > --
> > Michele Sciabarra
> > michele@sciabarra.com
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:31 PM, Rob Allen wrote:
> > > On 20 Jun 2018, at 16:24, Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Can we go with 0.9.0?
> > > >
> > >
> > > 0.9.0 is fine with me.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Rob
> > >
>
--
Regards,
James Thomas
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>.
We need to also document a roadmap.
-r
> On Jun 20, 2018, at 1:23 PM, Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Good question James
>
> I think we create a check box list for release 1.0.0 in the release repo
> and discuss
> items on the list would need help from folks to take ownership.
>
> We can even create github MileStone for each release, and we can create
> today the 1.0.0 milestone and add issues to resolve before we can release.
>
>
> -- Carlos
>
>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 1:17 PM James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 0.9 makes sense to me.
>>
>> Something to think about it - what would constitute a 1.0 release? Whilst
>> the platform is still evolving rapidly, it has been in production on
>> multiple providers for over 12 months. What things would we like to tick
>> off before reaching this stage?
>>
>> On 20 June 2018 at 17:38, Michele Sciabarra <op...@sciabarra.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree with 0.9.0
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michele Sciabarra
>>> openwhisk@sciabarra.com
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:37 PM, Michele Sciabarra wrote:
>>>> I agree with 0.9.0.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Michele Sciabarra
>>>> michele@sciabarra.com
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:31 PM, Rob Allen wrote:
>>>>> On 20 Jun 2018, at 16:24, Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can we go with 0.9.0?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 0.9.0 is fine with me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Rob
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> James Thomas
>>
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
Good question James
I think we create a check box list for release 1.0.0 in the release repo
and discuss
items on the list would need help from folks to take ownership.
We can even create github MileStone for each release, and we can create
today the 1.0.0 milestone and add issues to resolve before we can release.
-- Carlos
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 1:17 PM James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 0.9 makes sense to me.
>
> Something to think about it - what would constitute a 1.0 release? Whilst
> the platform is still evolving rapidly, it has been in production on
> multiple providers for over 12 months. What things would we like to tick
> off before reaching this stage?
>
> On 20 June 2018 at 17:38, Michele Sciabarra <op...@sciabarra.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree with 0.9.0
> >
> > --
> > Michele Sciabarra
> > openwhisk@sciabarra.com
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:37 PM, Michele Sciabarra wrote:
> > > I agree with 0.9.0.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Michele Sciabarra
> > > michele@sciabarra.com
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:31 PM, Rob Allen wrote:
> > > > On 20 Jun 2018, at 16:24, Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Can we go with 0.9.0?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > 0.9.0 is fine with me.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Rob
> > > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> James Thomas
>
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by James Thomas <jt...@gmail.com>.
0.9 makes sense to me.
Something to think about it - what would constitute a 1.0 release? Whilst
the platform is still evolving rapidly, it has been in production on
multiple providers for over 12 months. What things would we like to tick
off before reaching this stage?
On 20 June 2018 at 17:38, Michele Sciabarra <op...@sciabarra.com> wrote:
> I agree with 0.9.0
>
> --
> Michele Sciabarra
> openwhisk@sciabarra.com
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:37 PM, Michele Sciabarra wrote:
> > I agree with 0.9.0.
> >
> > --
> > Michele Sciabarra
> > michele@sciabarra.com
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:31 PM, Rob Allen wrote:
> > > On 20 Jun 2018, at 16:24, Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Can we go with 0.9.0?
> > > >
> > >
> > > 0.9.0 is fine with me.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Rob
> > >
>
--
Regards,
James Thomas
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Michele Sciabarra <op...@sciabarra.com>.
I agree with 0.9.0
--
Michele Sciabarra
openwhisk@sciabarra.com
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:37 PM, Michele Sciabarra wrote:
> I agree with 0.9.0.
>
> --
> Michele Sciabarra
> michele@sciabarra.com
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:31 PM, Rob Allen wrote:
> > On 20 Jun 2018, at 16:24, Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Can we go with 0.9.0?
> > >
> >
> > 0.9.0 is fine with me.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Rob
> >
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Michele Sciabarra <mi...@sciabarra.com>.
I agree with 0.9.0.
--
Michele Sciabarra
michele@sciabarra.com
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, at 6:31 PM, Rob Allen wrote:
> On 20 Jun 2018, at 16:24, Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > Can we go with 0.9.0?
> >
>
> 0.9.0 is fine with me.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rob
>
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Rob Allen <ro...@akrabat.com>.
On 20 Jun 2018, at 16:24, Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Can we go with 0.9.0?
>
0.9.0 is fine with me.
Regards,
Rob
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
I would like to use `0.x.0`, I'm ok with `0.9.0`
And practice and polish and streamline/automate the announcements and
install instructions (webiste, twitter).
I would like to reserve the 1.0.0 for a big splash announcement
Also have for release 1.0.0 an easy and clear instructions on the website,
where people can go there hit download version x.y.z, follow a simple
INSTALL README, that with a single/couple of commands they can build and
deploy using only the versions of the artifacts they just downloaded.
Here is what I predict, that people from Incubating mailing list including
PMC (assuming no experts on OpenWhisk) would try to do the following to
provide a +1 vote.
Things typically checked when someone votes:
1. incubating in binary and src release $version name artifacts
2. signatures and hashes correct
3. LICENSE is fine
4. NOTICE is OK.
5. no unexpected binary files
6. source files have headers
7. follow top level README and achieve the following 3 steps
8. 1. can build the release $version from source without any error
9. 2. can deploy what I built in previous step
10. 3. can run a hello demo action with the deployment from previous step
I +1 moving forward with [VOTE] on dev list
I think if we can do the first 6 steps, should be able to get a votes to
release
But in the future for release 1.0.0 if we don't have all 10 steps in place
I will vote -1
-cs
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:25 AM Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Understand that we may not want people to infer too much from 1.0
> especially since we likely need to address formalizing the
> versions/signatures of our APIs as well as SPIs.
>
> I would suggest what I often do in this case and use a nearer to 1.0
> version such as 0.9.0 which is perhaps a compromise (note you can bump the
> 'x' in 0.x.0 any number of times you wish) and indicates we are "close" to
> a 1.0.
>
> Can we go with 0.9.0?
>
> -mr
>
>
>
> From: Rob Allen <ro...@akrabat.com>
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> Date: 06/20/2018 09:46 AM
> Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
>
>
>
> > On 20 Jun 2018, at 15:29, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 4:28 PM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> ...I'd rather start with < 1.0 also and work up to a 1.0 release...
> >
> > Big +1 to that, especially as initial releases may fail due to formal
> > aspects, unrelated to their technical quality.
>
> FWiW, I'm also in the <1.0 camp.
>
> 1.0 is a commitment to backwards compatibility. I'm not sure that promise
> can be made quite yet.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rob
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Matt Rutkowski <mr...@us.ibm.com>.
Understand that we may not want people to infer too much from 1.0
especially since we likely need to address formalizing the
versions/signatures of our APIs as well as SPIs.
I would suggest what I often do in this case and use a nearer to 1.0
version such as 0.9.0 which is perhaps a compromise (note you can bump the
'x' in 0.x.0 any number of times you wish) and indicates we are "close" to
a 1.0.
Can we go with 0.9.0?
-mr
From: Rob Allen <ro...@akrabat.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 06/20/2018 09:46 AM
Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
> On 20 Jun 2018, at 15:29, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 4:28 PM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ...I'd rather start with < 1.0 also and work up to a 1.0 release...
>
> Big +1 to that, especially as initial releases may fail due to formal
> aspects, unrelated to their technical quality.
FWiW, I'm also in the <1.0 camp.
1.0 is a commitment to backwards compatibility. I'm not sure that promise
can be made quite yet.
Regards,
Rob
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Rob Allen <ro...@akrabat.com>.
> On 20 Jun 2018, at 15:29, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 4:28 PM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ...I'd rather start with < 1.0 also and work up to a 1.0 release...
>
> Big +1 to that, especially as initial releases may fail due to formal
> aspects, unrelated to their technical quality.
FWiW, I'm also in the <1.0 camp.
1.0 is a commitment to backwards compatibility. I'm not sure that promise can be made quite yet.
Regards,
Rob
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 4:28 PM Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...I'd rather start with < 1.0 also and work up to a 1.0 release...
Big +1 to that, especially as initial releases may fail due to formal
aspects, unrelated to their technical quality.
-Bertrand
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Rodric Rabbah <ro...@gmail.com>.
+1 to Chetan's points. I raised similar points before - even with respect
to the API there are some things we would like to change, some of the
internal interfaces, and the testing interfaces as well.
I'd rather start with < 1.0 also and work up to a 1.0 release - I think we
are all as contributors really proud of what we've built but 1.0 is special
and we should hold it back.
For reference, https://kafka.apache.org/downloads
-r
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 10:21 AM, Chetan Mehrotra <chetan.mehrotra@gmail.com
> wrote:
> > The version name is called incubator-1.0.0
>
> Not yet looked into details but wanted to comment on versioning. May
> be we keep it somewhat lower like 0.5.0 or 0.8.0. As we are still
> evolving the design wrt various extension points and some of the SPI
> interfaces are still evolving. With a 1.0 release we would need to
> ensure that all of the APIs are stable and also possibly the SPI
> interfaces are also somewhat stable.
>
> A 1.0 version is special :). So would be better to think what we
> consider a 1.0 release in more detail in terms of feature set it
> supports.
> Chetan Mehrotra
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > Dave,
> >
> > We will release the artifacts for source code only, so there will not be
> tagged docker images. It does not matter what we have tagged the existing
> images.
> >
> >
> > Best wishes.
> > Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
> >
> > Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM
> Cloud
> >
> > Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> > Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> > Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United
> States
> >
> > -----"David P Grove" <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
> > To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> > From: "David P Grove" <gr...@us.ibm.com>
> > Date: 06/20/2018 08:27AM
> > Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
> >
> >
> >
> > "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote on 06/20/2018 06:47:25 AM:
> >>
> >> We are currently working on the first release of OpenWhisk. The
> >> version name is called incubator-1.0.0, and the subversion is
> >> rc2(rc1 as a pilot, has been existing for while).
> >>
> >> There will be 13 openwhisk projected to be released.
> >> The PR in OpenWhisk release repo contains all the information of the
> >> hash values of all the repositories: https://
> >> urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
> >>
> > u=https-3A__github.com_apache_incubator-2Dopenwhisk-
> 2Drelease_pull_190&d=DwIFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-
> >
> >> siA1ZOg&r=Fe4FicGBU_20P2yihxV-
> >> apaNSFb6BSj6AlkptSF2gMk&m=fyO8VqoMt6Yv9Lv7Yf5eUOQgH74eoKPi_3p_WU-
> >> hZEw&s=mONyOT6wjdWl4JJQg685CHlwAU469EtEj_c49PytCnI&e=. The artifacts
> >> will be generated, when this PR is merged.
> >>
> >> If you have any questions or concerns, please chime in with your
> > comments.
> >>
> >
> > This is great!!
> >
> > I had a procedural question, is part of the release process changing the
> > various "latest" tags for docker images (openwhisk/invoker, etc) to
> > "incubator-1.0.0" in the ansible/yaml files that specify docker images to
> > pull, or is that not needed because this is a source only release and
> there
> > will not be matching docker images?
> >
> > --dave
> >
>
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Chetan Mehrotra <ch...@gmail.com>.
> The version name is called incubator-1.0.0
Not yet looked into details but wanted to comment on versioning. May
be we keep it somewhat lower like 0.5.0 or 0.8.0. As we are still
evolving the design wrt various extension points and some of the SPI
interfaces are still evolving. With a 1.0 release we would need to
ensure that all of the APIs are stable and also possibly the SPI
interfaces are also somewhat stable.
A 1.0 version is special :). So would be better to think what we
consider a 1.0 release in more detail in terms of feature set it
supports.
Chetan Mehrotra
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Dave,
>
> We will release the artifacts for source code only, so there will not be tagged docker images. It does not matter what we have tagged the existing images.
>
>
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
>
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
>
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
>
> -----"David P Grove" <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> From: "David P Grove" <gr...@us.ibm.com>
> Date: 06/20/2018 08:27AM
> Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
>
>
>
> "Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote on 06/20/2018 06:47:25 AM:
>>
>> We are currently working on the first release of OpenWhisk. The
>> version name is called incubator-1.0.0, and the subversion is
>> rc2(rc1 as a pilot, has been existing for while).
>>
>> There will be 13 openwhisk projected to be released.
>> The PR in OpenWhisk release repo contains all the information of the
>> hash values of all the repositories: https://
>> urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
>>
> u=https-3A__github.com_apache_incubator-2Dopenwhisk-2Drelease_pull_190&d=DwIFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-
>
>> siA1ZOg&r=Fe4FicGBU_20P2yihxV-
>> apaNSFb6BSj6AlkptSF2gMk&m=fyO8VqoMt6Yv9Lv7Yf5eUOQgH74eoKPi_3p_WU-
>> hZEw&s=mONyOT6wjdWl4JJQg685CHlwAU469EtEj_c49PytCnI&e=. The artifacts
>> will be generated, when this PR is merged.
>>
>> If you have any questions or concerns, please chime in with your
> comments.
>>
>
> This is great!!
>
> I had a procedural question, is part of the release process changing the
> various "latest" tags for docker images (openwhisk/invoker, etc) to
> "incubator-1.0.0" in the ansible/yaml files that specify docker images to
> pull, or is that not needed because this is a source only release and there
> will not be matching docker images?
>
> --dave
>
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by Vincent S Hou <sh...@us.ibm.com>.
Dave,
We will release the artifacts for source code only, so there will not be tagged docker images. It does not matter what we have tagged the existing images.
Best wishes.
Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
Phone: +1(919)254-7182
Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
-----"David P Grove" <gr...@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: "David P Grove" <gr...@us.ibm.com>
Date: 06/20/2018 08:27AM
Subject: Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
"Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote on 06/20/2018 06:47:25 AM:
>
> We are currently working on the first release of OpenWhisk. The
> version name is called incubator-1.0.0, and the subversion is
> rc2(rc1 as a pilot, has been existing for while).
>
> There will be 13 openwhisk projected to be released.
> The PR in OpenWhisk release repo contains all the information of the
> hash values of all the repositories: https://
> urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
>
u=https-3A__github.com_apache_incubator-2Dopenwhisk-2Drelease_pull_190&d=DwIFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-
> siA1ZOg&r=Fe4FicGBU_20P2yihxV-
> apaNSFb6BSj6AlkptSF2gMk&m=fyO8VqoMt6Yv9Lv7Yf5eUOQgH74eoKPi_3p_WU-
> hZEw&s=mONyOT6wjdWl4JJQg685CHlwAU469EtEj_c49PytCnI&e=. The artifacts
> will be generated, when this PR is merged.
>
> If you have any questions or concerns, please chime in with your
comments.
>
This is great!!
I had a procedural question, is part of the release process changing the
various "latest" tags for docker images (openwhisk/invoker, etc) to
"incubator-1.0.0" in the ansible/yaml files that specify docker images to
pull, or is that not needed because this is a source only release and there
will not be matching docker images?
--dave
Re: [Release] Preparing the release of OpenWhisk
Posted by David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com>.
"Vincent S Hou" <sh...@us.ibm.com> wrote on 06/20/2018 06:47:25 AM:
>
> We are currently working on the first release of OpenWhisk. The
> version name is called incubator-1.0.0, and the subversion is
> rc2(rc1 as a pilot, has been existing for while).
>
> There will be 13 openwhisk projected to be released.
> The PR in OpenWhisk release repo contains all the information of the
> hash values of all the repositories: https://
> urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
>
u=https-3A__github.com_apache_incubator-2Dopenwhisk-2Drelease_pull_190&d=DwIFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-
> siA1ZOg&r=Fe4FicGBU_20P2yihxV-
> apaNSFb6BSj6AlkptSF2gMk&m=fyO8VqoMt6Yv9Lv7Yf5eUOQgH74eoKPi_3p_WU-
> hZEw&s=mONyOT6wjdWl4JJQg685CHlwAU469EtEj_c49PytCnI&e=. The artifacts
> will be generated, when this PR is merged.
>
> If you have any questions or concerns, please chime in with your
comments.
>
This is great!!
I had a procedural question, is part of the release process changing the
various "latest" tags for docker images (openwhisk/invoker, etc) to
"incubator-1.0.0" in the ansible/yaml files that specify docker images to
pull, or is that not needed because this is a source only release and there
will not be matching docker images?
--dave