calcite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating (release candidate 1)
Date Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:53:08 GMT
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 <jhyde@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 <jacques@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" <julian@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 <jacques@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
> >> >>
> >>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message