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

Posted to dev@hbase.apache.org by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> on 2022/06/01 05:07:22 UTC

[DISCUSS] First release candidate for 2.5.0 (RC0) is available for evaluation

This is not a VOTE.

HBase 2.5.0RC0 is ready for testing, other evaluation, and consideration of
compatibility concerns.

The release notes need to be rebased on the latest 2.4.x release, 2.4.12.
Fix
versions on relvant JIRAs must be cleaned up first. This is in progress. I
also plan to try our new audit tool for matching git history and fix
versions.

There are known flaky unit tests and minor issues. You can find them by
searching for the '2.5.1' fix version, or this URL:

  https://s.apache.org/hbase-v2.5.1

The compatibility report, based on 2.4.12, can be found here:


https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/2.5.0RC0/api_compare_2.4.12_to_2.5.0RC0.html

An initial response to some of the findings can be found on HBASE-27081,
along
with additional discussion. Further discussion is probably necessary.

The tag to be evaluated is 2.5.0RC0:

  https://github.com/apache/hbase/tree/2.5.0RC0

This tag currently points to git reference 2da2dd917 .

The release files, including signatures, digests, as well as CHANGES.md
and RELEASENOTES.md included in this RC can be found at:

  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/2.5.0RC0/

Maven artifacts are available in a staging repository at:

  https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1486/

Artifacts were signed with the 0xD5365CCD key which can be found in:

  https://downloads.apache.org/hbase/KEYS

The second release candidate, 2.5.0RC1, will be made available for
evaluation
after discussion and any necessary changes and fixes have settled.

Best,

Your 2.5 Release Manager

Re: [DISCUSS] First release candidate for 2.5.0 (RC0) is available for evaluation

Posted by Wellington Chevreuil <we...@gmail.com>.

Thanks, Andrew. Had now committed HBASE-27017 into branch-2.5.

Em dom., 5 de jun. de 2022 às 21:25, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
escreveu:

> Thanks Wellington.
>
> I changed the issue type of HBASE-26826 so it will show up as a new
> feature.
>
> Please feel free to commit HBASE-27017 (and any other bug fix) to
> branch-2.5. There are a few other changes committed to the branch post
> 2.5.0RC0 too that will get rolled up into RC1 on Monday.
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 5, 2022 at 12:45 PM Wellington Chevreuil <
> wellington.chevreuil@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Even for branch-2.4, we can start placing links into the file, at the
> > top,
> > > leaving the output of the prior process in place below. I think it is
> > fine
> > > to make this change everywhere. Curious what others think.
> > >
> > Sounds ok to me.
> >
> > Regarding CHANGES.md content, it's listing HBASE-26826
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26826> (the SFT backport to
> > branch-2.5) under the "OTHER" section. Just wondering if we should move
> it
> > to "NEW FEATURE", or maybe add HBASE-26067 (the original SFT parent jira)
> > under the "NEW FEATURES" section? Or is this actually intentional,
> > considering SFT is experimental?
> >
> > Finally, we have a fresh new SFT bug fix in HBASE-27017, is it too late
> for
> > a commit into branch-2.5?
> >
> > Em qui., 2 de jun. de 2022 às 19:55, Huaxiang Sun <huaxiangsun@gmail.com
> >
> > escreveu:
> >
> > > +1 to make the change everywhere. Sometimes, there is a need to update
> > the
> > > release field after jira is released (in theory, it should not happen).
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Huaxiang
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 10:56 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Even for branch-2.4, we can start placing links into the file, at the
> > > top,
> > > > leaving the output of the prior process in place below. I think it is
> > > fine
> > > > to make this change everywhere. Curious what others think.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 10:54 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I see, that would be totally fine with me if we just do the link
> > > instead
> > > > > of generating the files every time.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 9:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> palomino219@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Oh, wait a minute. IIRC we have a consensus to use the jira page
> as
> > > > >> release
> > > > >> note instead of committing a file to the repo? The problem is
> that,
> > > > >> sometimes we just missed something in CHANGES.md or
> RELEASENOTES.md,
> > > no
> > > > >> actually code change, but since we have committed these files to
> our
> > > git
> > > > >> repo, we have to sink the RC and generate a new one.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> IIRC for making the two alpha releases for 3.0.0, I have already
> > > started
> > > > >> to
> > > > >> link the jira page instead of CHANGES.md and RELEASENOTES.md.
> Maybe
> > we
> > > > >> could just remove these steps from the create release scripts? But
> > > maybe
> > > > >> for branch-2.4 we still need to use these steps...
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四 22:56写道：
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > I just noticed the release notes issue on the branch last
> evening.
> > > > Let’s
> > > > >> > add the spotless application to the release note generation step
> > in
> > > > >> > create-release at least or it will keep happening. The RM does
> not
> > > > get a
> > > > >> > chance to intervene. The script uses the RM credentials to
> commit
> > > > >> > immediately after generating the files.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > > On Jun 2, 2022, at 5:31 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Oh, I think we should include HBASE-27023, it fixes the
> license
> > > > issue
> > > > >> > after
> > > > >> > > we apply the spotless formatter where it will add the license
> > > header
> > > > >> > > automatically.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > And also, it seems that the generated RELEASENOTE.md will
> > > introduce
> > > > >> some
> > > > >> > > lines ending with whitespace, then it will cause pre commit
> > build
> > > > >> > failure.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > I think we should run a spotless:apply before committing the
> > files
> > > > in
> > > > >> the
> > > > >> > > release scripts, and maybe we should also add spotless:check
> in
> > > the
> > > > >> mvn
> > > > >> > > verify stage so it will also fail the mvn install command,
> which
> > > > will
> > > > >> let
> > > > >> > > developers pay more attention on it.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Let me open an issue to land these changes.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四 11:14写道：
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >> OK, got it. Thanks for the clarification~
> > > > >> > >>
> > > > >> > >> Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四
> > 11:12写道：
> > > > >> > >>
> > > > >> > >>> I don’t think a flaky test is cause to fail the release. So
> > > these
> > > > >> all
> > > > >> > >>> have a fix version of 2.5.1. I mentioned them so people
> could
> > be
> > > > >> aware
> > > > >> > of
> > > > >> > >>> these known issue when evaluating their own findings. Hope
> > that
> > > > >> helps.
> > > > >> > >>>
> > > > >> > >>>>> On Jun 1, 2022, at 8:11 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >> > >>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>> On flakyness, if it is a big problem on promoting the
> RC, I
> > > > >> think we
> > > > >> > >>> can
> > > > >> > >>>> ignore the test first(instead of removing it).
> > > > >> > >>>>
> > > > >> > >>>> Can open a follow on issue to make it stable.
> > > > >> > >>>>
> > > > >> > >>>> Thanks.
> > > > >> > >>>>
> > > > >> > >>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年6月1日周三 23:25写道：
> > > > >> > >>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>> Makes sense and if nobody has a concern we can do that.
> > > > >> > >>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>> Also you wanted to support the change to the RSGroup API
> and
> > > put
> > > > >> back
> > > > >> > >>> the
> > > > >> > >>>>> unit test (and fix it to not flake), correct, which seems
> > fine
> > > > to
> > > > >> me
> > > > >> > >>> too.
> > > > >> > >>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>> On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 10:54 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > > > >> > palomino219@gmail.com
> > > > >> > >>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>> The ReplicationLoadSink change is done in HBASE-26490,
> this
> > > is
> > > > >> the
> > > > >> > >>> commit
> > > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/hbase/commit/b5b286d793f00ec8b9ed02f51fd9324e46f29c86
> > > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>> The constructor is marked as IA.Private so I do not think
> > we
> > > > >> need to
> > > > >> > >>>>>> restore it back.
> > > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>> Thanks.
> > > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年6月1日周三
> 13:08写道：
> > > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> This is not a VOTE.
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> HBase 2.5.0RC0 is ready for testing, other evaluation,
> and
> > > > >> > >>>>> consideration
> > > > >> > >>>>>> of
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> compatibility concerns.
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> The release notes need to be rebased on the latest 2.4.x
> > > > >> release,
> > > > >> > >>>>> 2.4.12.
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> Fix
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> versions on relvant JIRAs must be cleaned up first. This
> > is
> > > in
> > > > >> > >>>>> progress.
> > > > >> > >>>>>> I
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> also plan to try our new audit tool for matching git
> > history
> > > > and
> > > > >> > fix
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> versions.
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> There are known flaky unit tests and minor issues. You
> can
> > > > find
> > > > >> > them
> > > > >> > >>> by
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> searching for the '2.5.1' fix version, or this URL:
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> https://s.apache.org/hbase-v2.5.1
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> The compatibility report, based on 2.4.12, can be found
> > > here:
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/2.5.0RC0/api_compare_2.4.12_to_2.5.0RC0.html
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> An initial response to some of the findings can be found
> > on
> > > > >> > >>>>> HBASE-27081,
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> along
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> with additional discussion. Further discussion is
> probably
> > > > >> > necessary.
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> The tag to be evaluated is 2.5.0RC0:
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/tree/2.5.0RC0
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> This tag currently points to git reference 2da2dd917 .
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> The release files, including signatures, digests, as
> well
> > as
> > > > >> > >>> CHANGES.md
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> and RELEASENOTES.md included in this RC can be found at:
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/2.5.0RC0/
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> Maven artifacts are available in a staging repository
> at:
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>
> > > > >> >
> > > >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1486/
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> Artifacts were signed with the 0xD5365CCD key which can
> be
> > > > found
> > > > >> > in:
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> https://downloads.apache.org/hbase/KEYS
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> The second release candidate, 2.5.0RC1, will be made
> > > available
> > > > >> for
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> evaluation
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> after discussion and any necessary changes and fixes
> have
> > > > >> settled.
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> Best,
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>> Your 2.5 Release Manager
> > > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>> --
> > > > >> > >>>>> Best regards,
> > > > >> > >>>>> Andrew
> > > > >> > >>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > > > >> > >>>>>   It's what we’ve earned
> > > > >> > >>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > > > >> > >>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > > > >> > >>>>>  - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> > > > >> > >>>>>
> > > > >> > >>>
> > > > >> > >>
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Andrew
> > > > >
> > > > > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > > > >     It's what we’ve earned
> > > > > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > > > > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > > > >    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > > >     It's what we’ve earned
> > > > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > > > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > > >    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
>     It's what we’ve earned
> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
>    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
>

Re: [DISCUSS] First release candidate for 2.5.0 (RC0) is available for evaluation

Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.

Thanks Wellington.

I changed the issue type of HBASE-26826 so it will show up as a new feature.

Please feel free to commit HBASE-27017 (and any other bug fix) to
branch-2.5. There are a few other changes committed to the branch post
2.5.0RC0 too that will get rolled up into RC1 on Monday.


On Sun, Jun 5, 2022 at 12:45 PM Wellington Chevreuil <
wellington.chevreuil@gmail.com> wrote:

> >
> > Even for branch-2.4, we can start placing links into the file, at the
> top,
> > leaving the output of the prior process in place below. I think it is
> fine
> > to make this change everywhere. Curious what others think.
> >
> Sounds ok to me.
>
> Regarding CHANGES.md content, it's listing HBASE-26826
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26826> (the SFT backport to
> branch-2.5) under the "OTHER" section. Just wondering if we should move it
> to "NEW FEATURE", or maybe add HBASE-26067 (the original SFT parent jira)
> under the "NEW FEATURES" section? Or is this actually intentional,
> considering SFT is experimental?
>
> Finally, we have a fresh new SFT bug fix in HBASE-27017, is it too late for
> a commit into branch-2.5?
>
> Em qui., 2 de jun. de 2022 às 19:55, Huaxiang Sun <hu...@gmail.com>
> escreveu:
>
> > +1 to make the change everywhere. Sometimes, there is a need to update
> the
> > release field after jira is released (in theory, it should not happen).
> >
> > Thanks
> > Huaxiang
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 10:56 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Even for branch-2.4, we can start placing links into the file, at the
> > top,
> > > leaving the output of the prior process in place below. I think it is
> > fine
> > > to make this change everywhere. Curious what others think.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 10:54 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I see, that would be totally fine with me if we just do the link
> > instead
> > > > of generating the files every time.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 9:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Oh, wait a minute. IIRC we have a consensus to use the jira page as
> > > >> release
> > > >> note instead of committing a file to the repo? The problem is that,
> > > >> sometimes we just missed something in CHANGES.md or RELEASENOTES.md,
> > no
> > > >> actually code change, but since we have committed these files to our
> > git
> > > >> repo, we have to sink the RC and generate a new one.
> > > >>
> > > >> IIRC for making the two alpha releases for 3.0.0, I have already
> > started
> > > >> to
> > > >> link the jira page instead of CHANGES.md and RELEASENOTES.md. Maybe
> we
> > > >> could just remove these steps from the create release scripts? But
> > maybe
> > > >> for branch-2.4 we still need to use these steps...
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks.
> > > >>
> > > >> Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四 22:56写道：
> > > >>
> > > >> > I just noticed the release notes issue on the branch last evening.
> > > Let’s
> > > >> > add the spotless application to the release note generation step
> in
> > > >> > create-release at least or it will keep happening. The RM does not
> > > get a
> > > >> > chance to intervene. The script uses the RM credentials to commit
> > > >> > immediately after generating the files.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > On Jun 2, 2022, at 5:31 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Oh, I think we should include HBASE-27023, it fixes the license
> > > issue
> > > >> > after
> > > >> > > we apply the spotless formatter where it will add the license
> > header
> > > >> > > automatically.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > And also, it seems that the generated RELEASENOTE.md will
> > introduce
> > > >> some
> > > >> > > lines ending with whitespace, then it will cause pre commit
> build
> > > >> > failure.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > I think we should run a spotless:apply before committing the
> files
> > > in
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > release scripts, and maybe we should also add spotless:check in
> > the
> > > >> mvn
> > > >> > > verify stage so it will also fail the mvn install command, which
> > > will
> > > >> let
> > > >> > > developers pay more attention on it.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Let me open an issue to land these changes.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四 11:14写道：
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >> OK, got it. Thanks for the clarification~
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四
> 11:12写道：
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>> I don’t think a flaky test is cause to fail the release. So
> > these
> > > >> all
> > > >> > >>> have a fix version of 2.5.1. I mentioned them so people could
> be
> > > >> aware
> > > >> > of
> > > >> > >>> these known issue when evaluating their own findings. Hope
> that
> > > >> helps.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>>> On Jun 1, 2022, at 8:11 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>> On flakyness, if it is a big problem on promoting the RC, I
> > > >> think we
> > > >> > >>> can
> > > >> > >>>> ignore the test first(instead of removing it).
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>> Can open a follow on issue to make it stable.
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>> Thanks.
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年6月1日周三 23:25写道：
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>>> Makes sense and if nobody has a concern we can do that.
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>> Also you wanted to support the change to the RSGroup API and
> > put
> > > >> back
> > > >> > >>> the
> > > >> > >>>>> unit test (and fix it to not flake), correct, which seems
> fine
> > > to
> > > >> me
> > > >> > >>> too.
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>> On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 10:54 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > > >> > palomino219@gmail.com
> > > >> > >>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>> The ReplicationLoadSink change is done in HBASE-26490, this
> > is
> > > >> the
> > > >> > >>> commit
> > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/hbase/commit/b5b286d793f00ec8b9ed02f51fd9324e46f29c86
> > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>> The constructor is marked as IA.Private so I do not think
> we
> > > >> need to
> > > >> > >>>>>> restore it back.
> > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>> Thanks.
> > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年6月1日周三 13:08写道：
> > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> This is not a VOTE.
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> HBase 2.5.0RC0 is ready for testing, other evaluation, and
> > > >> > >>>>> consideration
> > > >> > >>>>>> of
> > > >> > >>>>>>> compatibility concerns.
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> The release notes need to be rebased on the latest 2.4.x
> > > >> release,
> > > >> > >>>>> 2.4.12.
> > > >> > >>>>>>> Fix
> > > >> > >>>>>>> versions on relvant JIRAs must be cleaned up first. This
> is
> > in
> > > >> > >>>>> progress.
> > > >> > >>>>>> I
> > > >> > >>>>>>> also plan to try our new audit tool for matching git
> history
> > > and
> > > >> > fix
> > > >> > >>>>>>> versions.
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> There are known flaky unit tests and minor issues. You can
> > > find
> > > >> > them
> > > >> > >>> by
> > > >> > >>>>>>> searching for the '2.5.1' fix version, or this URL:
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> https://s.apache.org/hbase-v2.5.1
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> The compatibility report, based on 2.4.12, can be found
> > here:
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/2.5.0RC0/api_compare_2.4.12_to_2.5.0RC0.html
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> An initial response to some of the findings can be found
> on
> > > >> > >>>>> HBASE-27081,
> > > >> > >>>>>>> along
> > > >> > >>>>>>> with additional discussion. Further discussion is probably
> > > >> > necessary.
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> The tag to be evaluated is 2.5.0RC0:
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/tree/2.5.0RC0
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> This tag currently points to git reference 2da2dd917 .
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> The release files, including signatures, digests, as well
> as
> > > >> > >>> CHANGES.md
> > > >> > >>>>>>> and RELEASENOTES.md included in this RC can be found at:
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/2.5.0RC0/
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> Maven artifacts are available in a staging repository at:
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> >
> > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1486/
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> Artifacts were signed with the 0xD5365CCD key which can be
> > > found
> > > >> > in:
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> https://downloads.apache.org/hbase/KEYS
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> The second release candidate, 2.5.0RC1, will be made
> > available
> > > >> for
> > > >> > >>>>>>> evaluation
> > > >> > >>>>>>> after discussion and any necessary changes and fixes have
> > > >> settled.
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> Best,
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> Your 2.5 Release Manager
> > > >> > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>> --
> > > >> > >>>>> Best regards,
> > > >> > >>>>> Andrew
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > > >> > >>>>>   It's what we’ve earned
> > > >> > >>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > > >> > >>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > > >> > >>>>>  - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> > > >> > >>>>>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > > >     It's what we’ve earned
> > > > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > > > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > > >    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > >     It's what we’ve earned
> > > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > >    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> > >
> >
>


-- 
Best regards,
Andrew

Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
    It's what we’ve earned
Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
   - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse

Re: [DISCUSS] First release candidate for 2.5.0 (RC0) is available for evaluation

Posted by Wellington Chevreuil <we...@gmail.com>.

>
> Even for branch-2.4, we can start placing links into the file, at the top,
> leaving the output of the prior process in place below. I think it is fine
> to make this change everywhere. Curious what others think.
>
Sounds ok to me.

Regarding CHANGES.md content, it's listing HBASE-26826
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26826> (the SFT backport to
branch-2.5) under the "OTHER" section. Just wondering if we should move it
to "NEW FEATURE", or maybe add HBASE-26067 (the original SFT parent jira)
under the "NEW FEATURES" section? Or is this actually intentional,
considering SFT is experimental?

Finally, we have a fresh new SFT bug fix in HBASE-27017, is it too late for
a commit into branch-2.5?

Em qui., 2 de jun. de 2022 às 19:55, Huaxiang Sun <hu...@gmail.com>
escreveu:

> +1 to make the change everywhere. Sometimes, there is a need to update the
> release field after jira is released (in theory, it should not happen).
>
> Thanks
> Huaxiang
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 10:56 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Even for branch-2.4, we can start placing links into the file, at the
> top,
> > leaving the output of the prior process in place below. I think it is
> fine
> > to make this change everywhere. Curious what others think.
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 10:54 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I see, that would be totally fine with me if we just do the link
> instead
> > > of generating the files every time.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 9:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Oh, wait a minute. IIRC we have a consensus to use the jira page as
> > >> release
> > >> note instead of committing a file to the repo? The problem is that,
> > >> sometimes we just missed something in CHANGES.md or RELEASENOTES.md,
> no
> > >> actually code change, but since we have committed these files to our
> git
> > >> repo, we have to sink the RC and generate a new one.
> > >>
> > >> IIRC for making the two alpha releases for 3.0.0, I have already
> started
> > >> to
> > >> link the jira page instead of CHANGES.md and RELEASENOTES.md. Maybe we
> > >> could just remove these steps from the create release scripts? But
> maybe
> > >> for branch-2.4 we still need to use these steps...
> > >>
> > >> Thanks.
> > >>
> > >> Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四 22:56写道：
> > >>
> > >> > I just noticed the release notes issue on the branch last evening.
> > Let’s
> > >> > add the spotless application to the release note generation step in
> > >> > create-release at least or it will keep happening. The RM does not
> > get a
> > >> > chance to intervene. The script uses the RM credentials to commit
> > >> > immediately after generating the files.
> > >> >
> > >> > > On Jun 2, 2022, at 5:31 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Oh, I think we should include HBASE-27023, it fixes the license
> > issue
> > >> > after
> > >> > > we apply the spotless formatter where it will add the license
> header
> > >> > > automatically.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > And also, it seems that the generated RELEASENOTE.md will
> introduce
> > >> some
> > >> > > lines ending with whitespace, then it will cause pre commit build
> > >> > failure.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I think we should run a spotless:apply before committing the files
> > in
> > >> the
> > >> > > release scripts, and maybe we should also add spotless:check in
> the
> > >> mvn
> > >> > > verify stage so it will also fail the mvn install command, which
> > will
> > >> let
> > >> > > developers pay more attention on it.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Let me open an issue to land these changes.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四 11:14写道：
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> OK, got it. Thanks for the clarification~
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四 11:12写道：
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>> I don’t think a flaky test is cause to fail the release. So
> these
> > >> all
> > >> > >>> have a fix version of 2.5.1. I mentioned them so people could be
> > >> aware
> > >> > of
> > >> > >>> these known issue when evaluating their own findings. Hope that
> > >> helps.
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>>> On Jun 1, 2022, at 8:11 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>> On flakyness, if it is a big problem on promoting the RC, I
> > >> think we
> > >> > >>> can
> > >> > >>>> ignore the test first(instead of removing it).
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>> Can open a follow on issue to make it stable.
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>> Thanks.
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年6月1日周三 23:25写道：
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>> Makes sense and if nobody has a concern we can do that.
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>> Also you wanted to support the change to the RSGroup API and
> put
> > >> back
> > >> > >>> the
> > >> > >>>>> unit test (and fix it to not flake), correct, which seems fine
> > to
> > >> me
> > >> > >>> too.
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 10:54 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > >> > palomino219@gmail.com
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> The ReplicationLoadSink change is done in HBASE-26490, this
> is
> > >> the
> > >> > >>> commit
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/hbase/commit/b5b286d793f00ec8b9ed02f51fd9324e46f29c86
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> The constructor is marked as IA.Private so I do not think we
> > >> need to
> > >> > >>>>>> restore it back.
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> Thanks.
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年6月1日周三 13:08写道：
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> This is not a VOTE.
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> HBase 2.5.0RC0 is ready for testing, other evaluation, and
> > >> > >>>>> consideration
> > >> > >>>>>> of
> > >> > >>>>>>> compatibility concerns.
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> The release notes need to be rebased on the latest 2.4.x
> > >> release,
> > >> > >>>>> 2.4.12.
> > >> > >>>>>>> Fix
> > >> > >>>>>>> versions on relvant JIRAs must be cleaned up first. This is
> in
> > >> > >>>>> progress.
> > >> > >>>>>> I
> > >> > >>>>>>> also plan to try our new audit tool for matching git history
> > and
> > >> > fix
> > >> > >>>>>>> versions.
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> There are known flaky unit tests and minor issues. You can
> > find
> > >> > them
> > >> > >>> by
> > >> > >>>>>>> searching for the '2.5.1' fix version, or this URL:
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> https://s.apache.org/hbase-v2.5.1
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> The compatibility report, based on 2.4.12, can be found
> here:
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/2.5.0RC0/api_compare_2.4.12_to_2.5.0RC0.html
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> An initial response to some of the findings can be found on
> > >> > >>>>> HBASE-27081,
> > >> > >>>>>>> along
> > >> > >>>>>>> with additional discussion. Further discussion is probably
> > >> > necessary.
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> The tag to be evaluated is 2.5.0RC0:
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/tree/2.5.0RC0
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> This tag currently points to git reference 2da2dd917 .
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> The release files, including signatures, digests, as well as
> > >> > >>> CHANGES.md
> > >> > >>>>>>> and RELEASENOTES.md included in this RC can be found at:
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/2.5.0RC0/
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Maven artifacts are available in a staging repository at:
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1486/
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Artifacts were signed with the 0xD5365CCD key which can be
> > found
> > >> > in:
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> https://downloads.apache.org/hbase/KEYS
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> The second release candidate, 2.5.0RC1, will be made
> available
> > >> for
> > >> > >>>>>>> evaluation
> > >> > >>>>>>> after discussion and any necessary changes and fixes have
> > >> settled.
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Best,
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Your 2.5 Release Manager
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>> --
> > >> > >>>>> Best regards,
> > >> > >>>>> Andrew
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > >> > >>>>>   It's what we’ve earned
> > >> > >>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > >> > >>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > >> > >>>>>  - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > >     It's what we’ve earned
> > > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > >    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew
> >
> > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> >     It's what we’ve earned
> > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> >    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] First release candidate for 2.5.0 (RC0) is available for evaluation

Posted by Huaxiang Sun <hu...@gmail.com>.

+1 to make the change everywhere. Sometimes, there is a need to update the
release field after jira is released (in theory, it should not happen).

Thanks
Huaxiang


On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 10:56 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:

> Even for branch-2.4, we can start placing links into the file, at the top,
> leaving the output of the prior process in place below. I think it is fine
> to make this change everywhere. Curious what others think.
>
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 10:54 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I see, that would be totally fine with me if we just do the link instead
> > of generating the files every time.
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 9:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Oh, wait a minute. IIRC we have a consensus to use the jira page as
> >> release
> >> note instead of committing a file to the repo? The problem is that,
> >> sometimes we just missed something in CHANGES.md or RELEASENOTES.md, no
> >> actually code change, but since we have committed these files to our git
> >> repo, we have to sink the RC and generate a new one.
> >>
> >> IIRC for making the two alpha releases for 3.0.0, I have already started
> >> to
> >> link the jira page instead of CHANGES.md and RELEASENOTES.md. Maybe we
> >> could just remove these steps from the create release scripts? But maybe
> >> for branch-2.4 we still need to use these steps...
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >> Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四 22:56写道：
> >>
> >> > I just noticed the release notes issue on the branch last evening.
> Let’s
> >> > add the spotless application to the release note generation step in
> >> > create-release at least or it will keep happening. The RM does not
> get a
> >> > chance to intervene. The script uses the RM credentials to commit
> >> > immediately after generating the files.
> >> >
> >> > > On Jun 2, 2022, at 5:31 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Oh, I think we should include HBASE-27023, it fixes the license
> issue
> >> > after
> >> > > we apply the spotless formatter where it will add the license header
> >> > > automatically.
> >> > >
> >> > > And also, it seems that the generated RELEASENOTE.md will introduce
> >> some
> >> > > lines ending with whitespace, then it will cause pre commit build
> >> > failure.
> >> > >
> >> > > I think we should run a spotless:apply before committing the files
> in
> >> the
> >> > > release scripts, and maybe we should also add spotless:check in the
> >> mvn
> >> > > verify stage so it will also fail the mvn install command, which
> will
> >> let
> >> > > developers pay more attention on it.
> >> > >
> >> > > Let me open an issue to land these changes.
> >> > >
> >> > > 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四 11:14写道：
> >> > >
> >> > >> OK, got it. Thanks for the clarification~
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四 11:12写道：
> >> > >>
> >> > >>> I don’t think a flaky test is cause to fail the release. So these
> >> all
> >> > >>> have a fix version of 2.5.1. I mentioned them so people could be
> >> aware
> >> > of
> >> > >>> these known issue when evaluating their own findings. Hope that
> >> helps.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>>> On Jun 1, 2022, at 8:11 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>> On flakyness, if it is a big problem on promoting the RC, I
> >> think we
> >> > >>> can
> >> > >>>> ignore the test first(instead of removing it).
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>> Can open a follow on issue to make it stable.
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>> Thanks.
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年6月1日周三 23:25写道：
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>> Makes sense and if nobody has a concern we can do that.
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>> Also you wanted to support the change to the RSGroup API and put
> >> back
> >> > >>> the
> >> > >>>>> unit test (and fix it to not flake), correct, which seems fine
> to
> >> me
> >> > >>> too.
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>>> On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 10:54 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> >> > palomino219@gmail.com
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>>> wrote:
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>> The ReplicationLoadSink change is done in HBASE-26490, this is
> >> the
> >> > >>> commit
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/hbase/commit/b5b286d793f00ec8b9ed02f51fd9324e46f29c86
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>> The constructor is marked as IA.Private so I do not think we
> >> need to
> >> > >>>>>> restore it back.
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>> Thanks.
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年6月1日周三 13:08写道：
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> This is not a VOTE.
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> HBase 2.5.0RC0 is ready for testing, other evaluation, and
> >> > >>>>> consideration
> >> > >>>>>> of
> >> > >>>>>>> compatibility concerns.
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> The release notes need to be rebased on the latest 2.4.x
> >> release,
> >> > >>>>> 2.4.12.
> >> > >>>>>>> Fix
> >> > >>>>>>> versions on relvant JIRAs must be cleaned up first. This is in
> >> > >>>>> progress.
> >> > >>>>>> I
> >> > >>>>>>> also plan to try our new audit tool for matching git history
> and
> >> > fix
> >> > >>>>>>> versions.
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> There are known flaky unit tests and minor issues. You can
> find
> >> > them
> >> > >>> by
> >> > >>>>>>> searching for the '2.5.1' fix version, or this URL:
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> https://s.apache.org/hbase-v2.5.1
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> The compatibility report, based on 2.4.12, can be found here:
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/2.5.0RC0/api_compare_2.4.12_to_2.5.0RC0.html
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> An initial response to some of the findings can be found on
> >> > >>>>> HBASE-27081,
> >> > >>>>>>> along
> >> > >>>>>>> with additional discussion. Further discussion is probably
> >> > necessary.
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> The tag to be evaluated is 2.5.0RC0:
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/tree/2.5.0RC0
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> This tag currently points to git reference 2da2dd917 .
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> The release files, including signatures, digests, as well as
> >> > >>> CHANGES.md
> >> > >>>>>>> and RELEASENOTES.md included in this RC can be found at:
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/2.5.0RC0/
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> Maven artifacts are available in a staging repository at:
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1486/
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> Artifacts were signed with the 0xD5365CCD key which can be
> found
> >> > in:
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> https://downloads.apache.org/hbase/KEYS
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> The second release candidate, 2.5.0RC1, will be made available
> >> for
> >> > >>>>>>> evaluation
> >> > >>>>>>> after discussion and any necessary changes and fixes have
> >> settled.
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> Best,
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> Your 2.5 Release Manager
> >> > >>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>> --
> >> > >>>>> Best regards,
> >> > >>>>> Andrew
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> >> > >>>>>   It's what we’ve earned
> >> > >>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> >> > >>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> >> > >>>>>  - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew
> >
> > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> >     It's what we’ve earned
> > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> >    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
>     It's what we’ve earned
> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
>    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
>

Re: [DISCUSS] First release candidate for 2.5.0 (RC0) is available for evaluation

Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.

Even for branch-2.4, we can start placing links into the file, at the top,
leaving the output of the prior process in place below. I think it is fine
to make this change everywhere. Curious what others think.

On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 10:54 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:

> I see, that would be totally fine with me if we just do the link instead
> of generating the files every time.
>
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 9:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Oh, wait a minute. IIRC we have a consensus to use the jira page as
>> release
>> note instead of committing a file to the repo? The problem is that,
>> sometimes we just missed something in CHANGES.md or RELEASENOTES.md, no
>> actually code change, but since we have committed these files to our git
>> repo, we have to sink the RC and generate a new one.
>>
>> IIRC for making the two alpha releases for 3.0.0, I have already started
>> to
>> link the jira page instead of CHANGES.md and RELEASENOTES.md. Maybe we
>> could just remove these steps from the create release scripts? But maybe
>> for branch-2.4 we still need to use these steps...
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四 22:56写道：
>>
>> > I just noticed the release notes issue on the branch last evening. Let’s
>> > add the spotless application to the release note generation step in
>> > create-release at least or it will keep happening. The RM does not get a
>> > chance to intervene. The script uses the RM credentials to commit
>> > immediately after generating the files.
>> >
>> > > On Jun 2, 2022, at 5:31 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Oh, I think we should include HBASE-27023, it fixes the license issue
>> > after
>> > > we apply the spotless formatter where it will add the license header
>> > > automatically.
>> > >
>> > > And also, it seems that the generated RELEASENOTE.md will introduce
>> some
>> > > lines ending with whitespace, then it will cause pre commit build
>> > failure.
>> > >
>> > > I think we should run a spotless:apply before committing the files in
>> the
>> > > release scripts, and maybe we should also add spotless:check in the
>> mvn
>> > > verify stage so it will also fail the mvn install command, which will
>> let
>> > > developers pay more attention on it.
>> > >
>> > > Let me open an issue to land these changes.
>> > >
>> > > 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四 11:14写道：
>> > >
>> > >> OK, got it. Thanks for the clarification~
>> > >>
>> > >> Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com> 于2022年6月2日周四 11:12写道：
>> > >>
>> > >>> I don’t think a flaky test is cause to fail the release. So these
>> all
>> > >>> have a fix version of 2.5.1. I mentioned them so people could be
>> aware
>> > of
>> > >>> these known issue when evaluating their own findings. Hope that
>> helps.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>>> On Jun 1, 2022, at 8:11 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> On flakyness, if it is a big problem on promoting the RC, I
>> think we
>> > >>> can
>> > >>>> ignore the test first(instead of removing it).
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Can open a follow on issue to make it stable.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Thanks.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年6月1日周三 23:25写道：
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>> Makes sense and if nobody has a concern we can do that.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Also you wanted to support the change to the RSGroup API and put
>> back
>> > >>> the
>> > >>>>> unit test (and fix it to not flake), correct, which seems fine to
>> me
>> > >>> too.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>> On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 10:54 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
>> > palomino219@gmail.com
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> The ReplicationLoadSink change is done in HBASE-26490, this is
>> the
>> > >>> commit
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/commit/b5b286d793f00ec8b9ed02f51fd9324e46f29c86
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> The constructor is marked as IA.Private so I do not think we
>> need to
>> > >>>>>> restore it back.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Thanks.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年6月1日周三 13:08写道：
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> This is not a VOTE.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> HBase 2.5.0RC0 is ready for testing, other evaluation, and
>> > >>>>> consideration
>> > >>>>>> of
>> > >>>>>>> compatibility concerns.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> The release notes need to be rebased on the latest 2.4.x
>> release,
>> > >>>>> 2.4.12.
>> > >>>>>>> Fix
>> > >>>>>>> versions on relvant JIRAs must be cleaned up first. This is in
>> > >>>>> progress.
>> > >>>>>> I
>> > >>>>>>> also plan to try our new audit tool for matching git history and
>> > fix
>> > >>>>>>> versions.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> There are known flaky unit tests and minor issues. You can find
>> > them
>> > >>> by
>> > >>>>>>> searching for the '2.5.1' fix version, or this URL:
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> https://s.apache.org/hbase-v2.5.1
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> The compatibility report, based on 2.4.12, can be found here:
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>
>> >
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/2.5.0RC0/api_compare_2.4.12_to_2.5.0RC0.html
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> An initial response to some of the findings can be found on
>> > >>>>> HBASE-27081,
>> > >>>>>>> along
>> > >>>>>>> with additional discussion. Further discussion is probably
>> > necessary.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> The tag to be evaluated is 2.5.0RC0:
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/tree/2.5.0RC0
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> This tag currently points to git reference 2da2dd917 .
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> The release files, including signatures, digests, as well as
>> > >>> CHANGES.md
>> > >>>>>>> and RELEASENOTES.md included in this RC can be found at:
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/2.5.0RC0/
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Maven artifacts are available in a staging repository at:
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>
>> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1486/
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Artifacts were signed with the 0xD5365CCD key which can be found
>> > in:
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> https://downloads.apache.org/hbase/KEYS
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> The second release candidate, 2.5.0RC1, will be made available
>> for
>> > >>>>>>> evaluation
>> > >>>>>>> after discussion and any necessary changes and fixes have
>> settled.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Best,
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Your 2.5 Release Manager
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> --
>> > >>>>> Best regards,
>> > >>>>> Andrew
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
>> > >>>>>   It's what we’ve earned
>> > >>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
>> > >>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
>> > >>>>>  - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> >
>>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
>     It's what we’ve earned
> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
>    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
>


-- 
Best regards,
Andrew

Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
    It's what we’ve earned
Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
   - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse