Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Flume >> mail # dev >> [VOTE] Release Apache Flume version 1.3.0


Copy link to this message
-
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flume version 1.3.0-rc3
If we're doing another RC, I'd like it if we could squeeze in FLUME-1660
too as I've seen several users inquiring about closing tmp files, and I
think it provides the best solution for many of them. I believe it was  
bumped out of 1.3 due to time constraints but it looks like that
shouldn't be an issue now?

Personally, +0 on the release, haven't found the time to do a thorough
check.

On 11/19/2012 01:36 AM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho wrote:
> Thank you sir,
> greatly appreciated!
>
> Jarcec
>
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 07:39:57PM -0800, Mike Percy wrote:
>> Done.
>>
>> Regards
>> Mike
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>
>>> Might I humbly ask for review & commit FLUME-1719 for next RC?
>>>
>>> Jarcec
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 07:13:26PM -0800, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
>>>> Done! Thanks Mike, Brock!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hari
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Hari Shreedharan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Saturday, November 17, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Brock Noland wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ok, let's do another rc since the same lobs with different versions is
>>> probably bad.
>>>>> Also I think it's fine to commit to 1.3 without another rc since we
>>> are voting on a tag, not the branch.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Brock Noland
>>>>> Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Saturday, November 17, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Mike Percy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hari,
>>>>>> You're correct that a -1 vote does not veto a release. A savvy user
>>> could
>>>>>> delete one of the jars before deploying to production, but why make
>>> them do
>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for the commit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Hari Shreedharan <
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mike,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I committed your patch for flume-1.4, and trunk.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Brock: As I posted on the jira, if you want it committed to
>>> flume-1.3. the
>>>>>>> RM should decide if another RC is required (looks like there are 3
>>> PMC +1
>>>>>>> already, unless someone withdraws the +1). If required, please
>>> cherry-pick
>>>>>>> the patch to flume-1.3.0 and roll another RC.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Hari
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Hari Shreedharan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Saturday, November 17, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Mike Percy wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When I was reviewing the libs I noticed that netty is in there
>>> twice
>>>>>>> with 2
>>>>>>>> different versions. I don't think we should ship like that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, -1 from me on this RC.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Details and a patch are here:
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLUME-1723
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Brock Noland <
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])(mailto:
>>>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]))> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Thanks Hari, I have created FLUME-1722 for this purpose.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLUME-1722
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Brock
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Hari Shreedharan
>>>>>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> +1.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Here is what I checked:
>>>>>>>>>> 1. Checksums and signatures look good.
>>>>>>>>>> 2. Verified license file, readme, change log and notice file
>>> (more on
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> this below).
>>>>>>>>>> 3. Built, ran unit tests, ran an agent with the sample
>>> config - looks
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> good.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Additional notes:
>>>>>>>>>> The LICENSE file seems to list three libraries which we do
>>> not pull
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> in:
>>>>>>>>>> commons logging
>>>>>>>>>> http-client
>>>>>>>>>> http-core
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> We probably should remove these from the license file too.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,