You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@calcite.apache.org by Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> on 2015/04/08 00:00:30 UTC
[VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Hi all,
I have created a build for Apache Calcite 1.2.0-incubating, release candidate 1.
Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this release. This is a short release,
less than a month after 1.1, but there are 42 fixed issues nevertheless. In
particular, Avatica has better coverage of the JDBC API and is much more
robust. You can read the release notes here:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-calcite/blob/branch-1.2/doc/HISTORY.md
The commit to be voted upon:
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-calcite/commit/d60f2aa3aa9ce7cda7c4f6986af5729d50a28679
Its hash is d60f2aa3aa9ce7cda7c4f6986af5729d50a28679.
The artifacts to be voted on are located here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/calcite/apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating-rc1
The hashes of the artifacts are as follows:
src.tar.gz.md5 ead5878c92896668a51ab71a4108b070
src.tar.gz.sha1 9cd0b8c542dd8b1af50661543e6af3c67ad9da82
src.zip.md5 85a547882c800677f46f59444c8a1539
src.zip.sha1 cefa18ab2243814ef8a2cde352d4059c2da3dc28
A staged Maven repository is available for review at:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecalcite-1007
Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/jhyde.asc
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Calcite 1.2.0-incubating.
The vote is open for the next 72 hours and passes if a majority of
at least three +1 PPMC votes are cast.
[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Calcite 1.2.0-incubating
[ ] 0 I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with the release
[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
Here is my vote:
+1 (binding)
Julian
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by Nick Dimiduk <nd...@gmail.com>.
I've tested the RC maven repo with my Phoenix changes. Everything looks
good.
+1 (non-binding)
On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Julian Hyde <ju...@hydromatic.net> wrote:
> I'd rather press ahead with the release. This is a minor issue in new
> functionality, and shows up in the test suite (not the build per se).
> I've logged https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-677 and will
> mention it in the release notes.
>
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > Build fails seems like a showstopper to me, especially if the fix is one
> > liner. Would rather redo here than have the Incubator general shoot it
> > down.
> > On Apr 10, 2015 2:13 AM, "Vladimir Sitnikov" <
> sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I've added @Ignore to the particular test and it went through.
> >> It's a bit annoying to break "mvn install", however I would not
> >> consider that a show-stopper either.
> >>
> >> Build works, mat-calcite-plugin works with Calcite 1.2.0-incubating.
> >>
> >> I would consider several modifications to mvn poms (see [1]), however
> >> those do not block the release either.
> >>
> >> +1 for the release
> >>
> >> [1]:
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-619?focusedCommentId=14489188&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14489188
> >>
> >> Vladimir
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org>.
Vladimir,
I think we are in agreement: (1) bugs are not a reason to delay a
release, (2) we need better testing.
Can you please log jira cases for the 2 testing improvements and 1 bug
cited in your message.
By the way I am ready to check in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-507 right after the
release, and will then start thinking about how to achieve
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-579.
Julian
On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Vladimir Sitnikov
<si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Regarding 'half of the world', I believe it is not the last time we are
> going to face the issue.
>
> I think it makes more sense to go ahead (release 1.2 as is), and start
> using CI to test such issues (e.g. to have CI runs in different time zones).
>
> Regarding 'releasing non-buildable' versions, I do not like that in
> general, however I think we never can give 100% guarantee, so it is fine to
> discuss/agree on the case by case basis.
>
> For instance, Calcite 1.2 uses identityHashCode as _unique_ identifiers of
> statements.
> Should I elaborate why that is inherently broken?
> Not sure if we should veto 1.2 due to the defect ('calcite executes wrong
> sql'), but that is clear example of 'never releasing due to fixes here and
> there'.
>
> Well, those kind of 'random' issues can be captured by durability testing.
> It would be nice to have a long running test (e.g. a couple of days) to
> test against memory leaks/random failures.
>
> Regards,
> Vladimir Sitnikov
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>.
Sounds good
On Apr 12, 2015 9:16 PM, "Julian Hyde" <jh...@apache.org> wrote:
> Jacques, you are correct; I prefer (b). Not that I like seeing a -1,
> but the vote at least provides a time constraint.
>
> The Apache voting process [
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html ] says:
>
> Votes on whether a package is ready to be released use majority
> approval -- i.e. at least three PMC members must vote affirmatively
> for release, and there must be more positive than negative votes.
> Releases may not be vetoed.
>
> This is markedly different from the consensus on which other kinds of
> votes operate. My interpretation is that they want to encourage
> progress over perfection, and avoid stalemate. We should of course
> hear all voices, and should strive to achieve consensus.
>
> I could have done a better job of reaching consensus during the vote.
>
> Jacques, I agree with you, the release is borderline. Please, let's
> release it and get to work on the next one.
>
> Julian
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Vladimir Sitnikov
> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Regarding 'half of the world', I believe it is not the last time we are
> > going to face the issue.
> >
> > I think it makes more sense to go ahead (release 1.2 as is), and start
> > using CI to test such issues (e.g. to have CI runs in different time
> zones).
> >
> > Regarding 'releasing non-buildable' versions, I do not like that in
> > general, however I think we never can give 100% guarantee, so it is fine
> to
> > discuss/agree on the case by case basis.
> >
> > For instance, Calcite 1.2 uses identityHashCode as _unique_ identifiers
> of
> > statements.
> > Should I elaborate why that is inherently broken?
> > Not sure if we should veto 1.2 due to the defect ('calcite executes wrong
> > sql'), but that is clear example of 'never releasing due to fixes here
> and
> > there'.
> >
> > Well, those kind of 'random' issues can be captured by durability
> testing.
> > It would be nice to have a long running test (e.g. a couple of days) to
> > test against memory leaks/random failures.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Vladimir Sitnikov
>
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org>.
Jacques, you are correct; I prefer (b). Not that I like seeing a -1,
but the vote at least provides a time constraint.
The Apache voting process [
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html ] says:
Votes on whether a package is ready to be released use majority
approval -- i.e. at least three PMC members must vote affirmatively
for release, and there must be more positive than negative votes.
Releases may not be vetoed.
This is markedly different from the consensus on which other kinds of
votes operate. My interpretation is that they want to encourage
progress over perfection, and avoid stalemate. We should of course
hear all voices, and should strive to achieve consensus.
I could have done a better job of reaching consensus during the vote.
Jacques, I agree with you, the release is borderline. Please, let's
release it and get to work on the next one.
Julian
On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Vladimir Sitnikov
<si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Regarding 'half of the world', I believe it is not the last time we are
> going to face the issue.
>
> I think it makes more sense to go ahead (release 1.2 as is), and start
> using CI to test such issues (e.g. to have CI runs in different time zones).
>
> Regarding 'releasing non-buildable' versions, I do not like that in
> general, however I think we never can give 100% guarantee, so it is fine to
> discuss/agree on the case by case basis.
>
> For instance, Calcite 1.2 uses identityHashCode as _unique_ identifiers of
> statements.
> Should I elaborate why that is inherently broken?
> Not sure if we should veto 1.2 due to the defect ('calcite executes wrong
> sql'), but that is clear example of 'never releasing due to fixes here and
> there'.
>
> Well, those kind of 'random' issues can be captured by durability testing.
> It would be nice to have a long running test (e.g. a couple of days) to
> test against memory leaks/random failures.
>
> Regards,
> Vladimir Sitnikov
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by Vladimir Sitnikov <si...@gmail.com>.
Regarding 'half of the world', I believe it is not the last time we are
going to face the issue.
I think it makes more sense to go ahead (release 1.2 as is), and start
using CI to test such issues (e.g. to have CI runs in different time zones).
Regarding 'releasing non-buildable' versions, I do not like that in
general, however I think we never can give 100% guarantee, so it is fine to
discuss/agree on the case by case basis.
For instance, Calcite 1.2 uses identityHashCode as _unique_ identifiers of
statements.
Should I elaborate why that is inherently broken?
Not sure if we should veto 1.2 due to the defect ('calcite executes wrong
sql'), but that is clear example of 'never releasing due to fixes here and
there'.
Well, those kind of 'random' issues can be captured by durability testing.
It would be nice to have a long running test (e.g. a couple of days) to
test against memory leaks/random failures.
Regards,
Vladimir Sitnikov
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>.
I hope it is okay if I separate this into two topics.
(1) Is the release okay
I'd say it is on the border. The source release itself has internal
instructions on how to build via README --> HOWTO. These instructions
don't work for half the world. If everyone else is okay with it, I am. I
hate having releases shot down on the general list and I've had one shot
before for this type of issue. If all the +1's for the release are onboard
with this, we should simply note it when the vote is started on the general
list. But procedurally, I absolutely agree that Julian is fine to proceed
if others have no additional responses on this thread in the 24h.
(2) If a PMC member expresses concerns about a release artifact, how would
we like to proceed in the future?
Two options I've seen that work are:
a) Extend the vote until we reach either a conclusion (or an extended
silence).
b) PMC should immediately state an initial -1 vote and state that their
vote can be changed based on other's feedback.
I was taking the approach (a) while it seems like Julian would prefer (b).
What do others think works well? Nick, Jesus and John, you're all members
of the Hive and/or HBase communities, what works well in those communities?
On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote:
> Let's extend the discussion for a further 24 hours.
>
> Procedurally, I don't think I can withdraw the result of the 1.2 RC1
> vote but if we can't reach lazy consensus in 24 hours (ending 10am
> Pacific on Sunday) I will discard RC1 and move on to an RC2.
>
> And for what it's worth, I believe that I was justified in calling the
> RC1 vote. We had the required excess of binding +1 votes over binding
> -1 votes, and as release manager I made the call that I thought the
> release was sound. After you expressed your reservations, Vladimir and
> Nick cast +1 votes. However, I now think I should have recorded your
> vote as -0.
>
> As for whether RC1 is suitable to be released. I argue that the
> documented build process succeeds because I intend to include a
> mention of CALCITE-677 and its workaround in the release announcement.
>
> Here are my arguments for why the release is sound. Calcite is on a
> short (1 month) release cycle and there are projects that depend on
> this release (Hive and now Phoenix). Yes, that affects my judgement
> about whether the release is fit for purpose, and it should.
> Engineering is a compromise. One line in the release notes documenting
> a workaround to a minor, locale-specific problem, in new
> functionality, that will be fixed in a release in less than a month,
> is better, in my opinion, than several days delay in the release, an
> extra day of my time to create a new RC and several hours of other
> people's time to vote on it.
>
> I would like to hear what the rest of the community thinks. To repeat,
> we can not change the result of the RC1 vote at this point, but it we
> cannot reach consensus in 24 hours I will discard RC1 and move on to
> an RC2.
>
> Julian
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 7:30 PM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > I didn't do an immediate -1 because I wanted to have a discussion. Not
> > waiting for the discussion to complete before calling the vote was
> > unfortunate.
> >
> > What was the big exception to spinning another release? To me, an Apache
> > release's two most important criteria are correct licensing and a default
> > build that works.
> > On Apr 10, 2015 10:14 AM, "Julian Hyde" <ju...@hydromatic.net> wrote:
> >
> >> I'd rather press ahead with the release. This is a minor issue in new
> >> functionality, and shows up in the test suite (not the build per se).
> >> I've logged https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-677 and will
> >> mention it in the release notes.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Build fails seems like a showstopper to me, especially if the fix is
> one
> >> > liner. Would rather redo here than have the Incubator general shoot it
> >> > down.
> >> > On Apr 10, 2015 2:13 AM, "Vladimir Sitnikov" <
> >> sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I've added @Ignore to the particular test and it went through.
> >> >> It's a bit annoying to break "mvn install", however I would not
> >> >> consider that a show-stopper either.
> >> >>
> >> >> Build works, mat-calcite-plugin works with Calcite 1.2.0-incubating.
> >> >>
> >> >> I would consider several modifications to mvn poms (see [1]), however
> >> >> those do not block the release either.
> >> >>
> >> >> +1 for the release
> >> >>
> >> >> [1]:
> >> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-619?focusedCommentId=14489188&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14489188
> >> >>
> >> >> Vladimir
> >> >>
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org>.
Let's extend the discussion for a further 24 hours.
Procedurally, I don't think I can withdraw the result of the 1.2 RC1
vote but if we can't reach lazy consensus in 24 hours (ending 10am
Pacific on Sunday) I will discard RC1 and move on to an RC2.
And for what it's worth, I believe that I was justified in calling the
RC1 vote. We had the required excess of binding +1 votes over binding
-1 votes, and as release manager I made the call that I thought the
release was sound. After you expressed your reservations, Vladimir and
Nick cast +1 votes. However, I now think I should have recorded your
vote as -0.
As for whether RC1 is suitable to be released. I argue that the
documented build process succeeds because I intend to include a
mention of CALCITE-677 and its workaround in the release announcement.
Here are my arguments for why the release is sound. Calcite is on a
short (1 month) release cycle and there are projects that depend on
this release (Hive and now Phoenix). Yes, that affects my judgement
about whether the release is fit for purpose, and it should.
Engineering is a compromise. One line in the release notes documenting
a workaround to a minor, locale-specific problem, in new
functionality, that will be fixed in a release in less than a month,
is better, in my opinion, than several days delay in the release, an
extra day of my time to create a new RC and several hours of other
people's time to vote on it.
I would like to hear what the rest of the community thinks. To repeat,
we can not change the result of the RC1 vote at this point, but it we
cannot reach consensus in 24 hours I will discard RC1 and move on to
an RC2.
Julian
On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 7:30 PM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> I didn't do an immediate -1 because I wanted to have a discussion. Not
> waiting for the discussion to complete before calling the vote was
> unfortunate.
>
> What was the big exception to spinning another release? To me, an Apache
> release's two most important criteria are correct licensing and a default
> build that works.
> On Apr 10, 2015 10:14 AM, "Julian Hyde" <ju...@hydromatic.net> wrote:
>
>> I'd rather press ahead with the release. This is a minor issue in new
>> functionality, and shows up in the test suite (not the build per se).
>> I've logged https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-677 and will
>> mention it in the release notes.
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > Build fails seems like a showstopper to me, especially if the fix is one
>> > liner. Would rather redo here than have the Incubator general shoot it
>> > down.
>> > On Apr 10, 2015 2:13 AM, "Vladimir Sitnikov" <
>> sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> I've added @Ignore to the particular test and it went through.
>> >> It's a bit annoying to break "mvn install", however I would not
>> >> consider that a show-stopper either.
>> >>
>> >> Build works, mat-calcite-plugin works with Calcite 1.2.0-incubating.
>> >>
>> >> I would consider several modifications to mvn poms (see [1]), however
>> >> those do not block the release either.
>> >>
>> >> +1 for the release
>> >>
>> >> [1]:
>> >>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-619?focusedCommentId=14489188&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14489188
>> >>
>> >> Vladimir
>> >>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>.
I didn't do an immediate -1 because I wanted to have a discussion. Not
waiting for the discussion to complete before calling the vote was
unfortunate.
What was the big exception to spinning another release? To me, an Apache
release's two most important criteria are correct licensing and a default
build that works.
On Apr 10, 2015 10:14 AM, "Julian Hyde" <ju...@hydromatic.net> wrote:
> I'd rather press ahead with the release. This is a minor issue in new
> functionality, and shows up in the test suite (not the build per se).
> I've logged https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-677 and will
> mention it in the release notes.
>
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > Build fails seems like a showstopper to me, especially if the fix is one
> > liner. Would rather redo here than have the Incubator general shoot it
> > down.
> > On Apr 10, 2015 2:13 AM, "Vladimir Sitnikov" <
> sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I've added @Ignore to the particular test and it went through.
> >> It's a bit annoying to break "mvn install", however I would not
> >> consider that a show-stopper either.
> >>
> >> Build works, mat-calcite-plugin works with Calcite 1.2.0-incubating.
> >>
> >> I would consider several modifications to mvn poms (see [1]), however
> >> those do not block the release either.
> >>
> >> +1 for the release
> >>
> >> [1]:
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-619?focusedCommentId=14489188&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14489188
> >>
> >> Vladimir
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by Julian Hyde <ju...@hydromatic.net>.
I'd rather press ahead with the release. This is a minor issue in new
functionality, and shows up in the test suite (not the build per se).
I've logged https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-677 and will
mention it in the release notes.
On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> Build fails seems like a showstopper to me, especially if the fix is one
> liner. Would rather redo here than have the Incubator general shoot it
> down.
> On Apr 10, 2015 2:13 AM, "Vladimir Sitnikov" <si...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I've added @Ignore to the particular test and it went through.
>> It's a bit annoying to break "mvn install", however I would not
>> consider that a show-stopper either.
>>
>> Build works, mat-calcite-plugin works with Calcite 1.2.0-incubating.
>>
>> I would consider several modifications to mvn poms (see [1]), however
>> those do not block the release either.
>>
>> +1 for the release
>>
>> [1]:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-619?focusedCommentId=14489188&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14489188
>>
>> Vladimir
>>
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>.
Build fails seems like a showstopper to me, especially if the fix is one
liner. Would rather redo here than have the Incubator general shoot it
down.
On Apr 10, 2015 2:13 AM, "Vladimir Sitnikov" <si...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I've added @Ignore to the particular test and it went through.
> It's a bit annoying to break "mvn install", however I would not
> consider that a show-stopper either.
>
> Build works, mat-calcite-plugin works with Calcite 1.2.0-incubating.
>
> I would consider several modifications to mvn poms (see [1]), however
> those do not block the release either.
>
> +1 for the release
>
> [1]:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-619?focusedCommentId=14489188&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14489188
>
> Vladimir
>
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by Vladimir Sitnikov <si...@gmail.com>.
I've added @Ignore to the particular test and it went through.
It's a bit annoying to break "mvn install", however I would not
consider that a show-stopper either.
Build works, mat-calcite-plugin works with Calcite 1.2.0-incubating.
I would consider several modifications to mvn poms (see [1]), however
those do not block the release either.
+1 for the release
[1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-619?focusedCommentId=14489188&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14489188
Vladimir
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by Julian Hyde <ju...@gmail.com>.
It worked for me; I guess it's showing up due to your east-of-Greenwich time zone.
It's a bug, but it's not a regression (this is new functionality) and I don't think it's a show-stopper.
Julian
> On Apr 10, 2015, at 00:18, Vladimir Sitnikov <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Build of Avatica Server fails for me as follows:
>
> java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<1980-12-17> but was:<1980-12-16>
> at org.apache.calcite.avatica.RemoteDriverTest.testTypeHandling(RemoteDriverTest.java:366)
>
> Running 1.8u40, mac, GMT+3.
>
> Vladimir
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by Vladimir Sitnikov <si...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
Build of Avatica Server fails for me as follows:
java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<1980-12-17> but was:<1980-12-16>
at org.apache.calcite.avatica.RemoteDriverTest.testTypeHandling(RemoteDriverTest.java:366)
Running 1.8u40, mac, GMT+3.
Vladimir
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by Yash Sharma <ya...@gmail.com>.
+1 Non-Binding
- Able to Download artifacts
- Verified Checksums md5 & sha1
- Able to extract and view README/NOTICE files
- Able to build from source
Env Details:
Ubuntu 14.04.2 LTS, Apache Maven 3.2.5, Java version: 1.7.0_75
On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 3:40 AM, James Taylor <ja...@apache.org>
wrote:
> +1. Tested Apache Calcite 1.2 with our current Phoenix integration and
> everything worked well.
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have created a build for Apache Calcite 1.2.0-incubating, release
> candidate 1.
> >
> > Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this release. This is a short
> release,
> > less than a month after 1.1, but there are 42 fixed issues nevertheless.
> In
> > particular, Avatica has better coverage of the JDBC API and is much more
> > robust. You can read the release notes here:
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-calcite/blob/branch-1.2/doc/HISTORY.md
> >
> > The commit to be voted upon:
> >
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-calcite/commit/d60f2aa3aa9ce7cda7c4f6986af5729d50a28679
> >
> > Its hash is d60f2aa3aa9ce7cda7c4f6986af5729d50a28679.
> >
> > The artifacts to be voted on are located here:
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/calcite/apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating-rc1
> >
> > The hashes of the artifacts are as follows:
> > src.tar.gz.md5 ead5878c92896668a51ab71a4108b070
> > src.tar.gz.sha1 9cd0b8c542dd8b1af50661543e6af3c67ad9da82
> > src.zip.md5 85a547882c800677f46f59444c8a1539
> > src.zip.sha1 cefa18ab2243814ef8a2cde352d4059c2da3dc28
> >
> > A staged Maven repository is available for review at:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecalcite-1007
> >
> > Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
> > https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/jhyde.asc
> >
> > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Calcite 1.2.0-incubating.
> >
> > The vote is open for the next 72 hours and passes if a majority of
> > at least three +1 PPMC votes are cast.
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Calcite 1.2.0-incubating
> > [ ] 0 I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with the release
> > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> >
> >
> > Here is my vote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Julian
>
Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Posted by James Taylor <ja...@apache.org>.
+1. Tested Apache Calcite 1.2 with our current Phoenix integration and
everything worked well.
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have created a build for Apache Calcite 1.2.0-incubating, release candidate 1.
>
> Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this release. This is a short release,
> less than a month after 1.1, but there are 42 fixed issues nevertheless. In
> particular, Avatica has better coverage of the JDBC API and is much more
> robust. You can read the release notes here:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-calcite/blob/branch-1.2/doc/HISTORY.md
>
> The commit to be voted upon:
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-calcite/commit/d60f2aa3aa9ce7cda7c4f6986af5729d50a28679
>
> Its hash is d60f2aa3aa9ce7cda7c4f6986af5729d50a28679.
>
> The artifacts to be voted on are located here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/calcite/apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating-rc1
>
> The hashes of the artifacts are as follows:
> src.tar.gz.md5 ead5878c92896668a51ab71a4108b070
> src.tar.gz.sha1 9cd0b8c542dd8b1af50661543e6af3c67ad9da82
> src.zip.md5 85a547882c800677f46f59444c8a1539
> src.zip.sha1 cefa18ab2243814ef8a2cde352d4059c2da3dc28
>
> A staged Maven repository is available for review at:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecalcite-1007
>
> Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
> https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/jhyde.asc
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Calcite 1.2.0-incubating.
>
> The vote is open for the next 72 hours and passes if a majority of
> at least three +1 PPMC votes are cast.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Calcite 1.2.0-incubating
> [ ] 0 I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with the release
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
>
> Here is my vote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Julian