spark-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Xiao Li <lix...@databricks.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Spark 2.4.2
Date Tue, 30 Apr 2019 05:30:33 GMT
Before cutting 2.4.3, I just submitted a PR
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/24493 for reverting the commit
https://github.com/apache/spark/commit/6f394a20bf49f67b4d6329a1c25171c8024a2fae
.

In general, we need to be very cautious about the Jackson upgrade in the
patch releases, especially when this upgrade could break the existing
behaviors of the external packages or data sources, and generate different
results after the upgrade. The external packages and data sources need to
change their source code to keep the original behaviors. The upgrade
requires more discussions before releasing it, I think.

In the previous PR https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22071, we turned
off `spark.master.rest.enabled` by default and added the following claim in
our security doc:

> The Rest Submission Server and the MesosClusterDispatcher do not support
> authentication.  You should ensure that all network access to the REST API
> & MesosClusterDispatcher (port 6066 and 7077 respectively by default) are
> restricted to hosts that are trusted to submit jobs.


We need to understand whether this Jackson CVE applies to Spark. Before
officially releasing the Jackson upgrade, we need more inputs from all of
you. Currently, I would suggest to revert this upgrade from the upcoming
2.4.3 release, which is for fixing the accidental default Scala version
changes in pre-built artifacts.

Xiao

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 8:51 PM Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon.hyun@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi, All and Xiao (as a next release manager).
>
> In any case, can the release manager include the information about the
> used release script as a part of VOTE email officially?
>
> That information will be very helpful to reproduce Spark build (in the
> downstream environment)
>
> Currently, it's not clearly which release script is used because the
> master branch is also changed time to time during multiple RCs.
>
> We only guess some githash based on the RC start time.
>
> Bests,
> Dongjoon.
>
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 7:17 PM Wenchen Fan <cloud0fan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >  it could just be fixed in master rather than back-port and re-roll the
>> RC
>>
>> I don't think the release script is part of the released product. That
>> said, we can just fix the release script in branch 2.4 without creating a
>> new RC. We can even create a new repo for the release script, like
>> spark-website, to make it clearer.
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 7:22 AM Sean Owen <srowen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think this is a reasonable idea; I know @vanzin had suggested it was
>>> simpler to use the latest in case a bug was found in the release script and
>>> then it could just be fixed in master rather than back-port and re-roll the
>>> RC. That said I think we did / had to already drop the ability to build <=
>>> 2.3 from the master release script already.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 9:25 PM Wenchen Fan <cloud0fan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> >  ... by using the release script of Spark 2.4 branch
>>>>
>>>> Shall we keep it as a policy? Previously we used the release script
>>>> from the master branch to do the release work for all Spark versions, now
I
>>>> feel it's simpler and less error-prone to let the release script only
>>>> handle one branch. We don't keep many branches as active at the same time,
>>>> so the maintenance overhead for the release script should be OK.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>

-- 
[image:
https://databricks.com/sparkaisummit/north-america?utm_source=email&utm_medium=signature]

Mime
View raw message