Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Brooklyn 1.0.0-M1 [rc1]
+1 from me
Checks successfully completed:
[✓] Download links work.
[✓] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
[✓] Expanded source archive matches contents of RC tag.
[✓] Expanded source archive builds and passes tests.
[✓] LICENSE is present and correct.
[✓] NOTICE is present and correct, including copyright date.
[✓] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
[✓] apache-brooklyn-1.0.0-M1-bin and br (on OSX) binaries work
[✓] I follow this project’s commits list
[✓] Deployed and stopped two of the provided sample apps on AWS
On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 at 13:31 Aled Sage <aled.sage@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> +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]
> [email@example.com:stdout] Node
> riak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx is not
> 2018-09-13T12:01:18,859 - DEBUG 128 o.a.b.SSH [Thread-1521]
> [firstname.lastname@example.org:stdout] Executed
> 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.
> 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
> > 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.