osdir.com

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Brooklyn 1.0.0-M1 [rc1]


+1 from me.

Here's what I tested:

1. installed/ran brooklyn (tar.gz) from local machine (os x); used it
   to spin up a blueprint for...
2. install/run brooklyn (rpm) on CentOS machine in AWS
3. deployed each of the 4 templates to aws:
    1. server-template
    2. bash-web-server-template
    3. bash-web-and-riak-template
    4. resilient-bash-web-cluster-template
4. deploy mysql (using https://github.com/brooklyncentral/brooklyn-mysql)
5. deployed a dynamic cluster of 100 'server' entities to localhost.
6. restarted Brooklyn by running `systemctl restart brooklyn` (to
   confirm that persistence/rebind works).

---
The one caveat is for (3.3) above: the riak cluster gave an error. Each node came up ok, but when it tried to run `joinCluster` for one of them it gave the error:

   2018-09-13T12:01:18,843 - DEBUG 128 o.a.b.SSH [Thread-1521]
   [co2yobqk8m@3.120.132.118:stdout] Node
   riak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx is not
   reachable!
   2018-09-13T12:01:18,859 - DEBUG 128 o.a.b.SSH [Thread-1521]
   [co2yobqk8m@3.120.132.118:stdout] Executed
   /tmp/brooklyn-20180913-120117508-g2Xj-joinCluster_RiakNodeImpl_id_co.sh,
   result 1

I tried it twice - same error each time.

I propose that we just create a jira issue to track this, rather than it blocking a milestone release.

Aled


On 12/09/2018 16:37, Thomas Bouron wrote:
Hi all

It's a solid +1 to me.

Here is the summary of my tests:
1. downloaded all artifacts
2. verified all signatures
3. build source with tests
4. launched Brooklyn vagrant and did sanity checks, i.e. up and running
5. launched Brooklyn (zip) and did sanity checks, i.e. up and running
6. used CLI to add locations
7. deployed the 4th quick launch template (Resilient Load-Balanced Bash Web Cluster (Brooklyn Example) in AWS and verify it was working

Item 1, 2, 3 and 4 were done automatically with the attached script.

On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 at 12:20 Richard Downer <richard@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:richard@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

    This thread is for discussions related to the release vote.

    I should clarify what we are looking for in a release vote.
    Particularly,
    we are looking for people to download,validate, and test the release.
    Only if you are satisfied that the artifacts are correct and the
    quality is
    high enough, should you make a "+1" vote. Alongside your vote you
    should
    list
    the checks that you made.

    Here is a good example: http://markmail.org/message/gevsz2pdciraw6jw

    The vote is not simply about "the master branch contains the
    features I
    wanted" -
    it is about making sure that *these* artifacts are *correct* (e.g.
    they are
    not corrupted, hashes and signatures pass) and are of
    *sufficiently high
    quality* to be stamped as an official release of The Apache Software
    Foundation.

    Why test the artifacts when master is looking good? Here are some
    reasons:

    - somebody could have made a commit that broke it, since you last
    git pulled
    - the release branch could have been made at the wrong point, or
    inconsistently
      between all of the submodules
    - something in the release process could have broken it
    - I could have made a mistake and corrupted the files
    - a problem with the Apache infrastructure could mean that the release
    files are
      unobtainable or corrupted

    This is why the release manager needs you to download the actual
    release
    artifacts and try them out.

    The way Apache works can be a bit arcane sometimes, but it's all
    done with
    a reason. If the vote passes then the contents of the email and
    its links
    become "endorsed" by The Apache Software Foundation, and the
    Foundation will
    take on legal liability for them, forever.

    And of course we want the best possible experience for our users -
    so we
    need
    the actual release files to be tested manually to make sure that a
    mistake
    does
    not ruin the experience for users.

    So if you can spare an hour or more to download some of the
    artifacts and
    try
    them out, then it will be *very* useful! The vote lasts for three
    days so
    there's no need to rush to get a vote in.

    Thanks!
    Richard

--

Thomas Bouron
Senior Software Engineer

*Cloudsoft <https://cloudsoft.io/> *| Bringing Business to the Cloud

GitHub: https://github.com/tbouron
Twitter: https://twitter.com/eltibouron

Need a hand with AWS? Get a Free Consultation.