It depends on the "host".
Last time Sijie was away and JV hosted the meeting. Usually we use the room
linked at
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BOOKKEEPER/Community+Meetings
(hosted by Siji @Twitter)

I don't know whether Sijie will attend.

If Sijie is not available does anyone volunteer to drive/host the meeting ?



2017-02-23 15:13 GMT+01:00 Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid>:

> What is the hangout URL we are going to use?  Last time there was
> confusion so I was not able to join, and I want to be sure I join the right
> one this time.
>
>
> - Bobby
>
> On Thursday, February 23, 2017, 2:06:08 AM CST, Enrico Olivelli <
> eolive...@gmail.com> wrote:Great!
>
> I have drafted the agenda of the next meeting
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BOOKKEEPER/
> 2017-2-24+Meeting+notes
>
>
> Enrico
>
>
> 2017-02-23 0:26 GMT+01:00 Venkateswara Rao Jujjuri <jujj...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Kishore has done bunch of work, and he is reviewing Enrico's patch.
> > I will request Kishore to be in next meeting. The patch kishore has takes
> > to Netty 4.1.7.
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I just filed BOOKKEEPER-1008 for this work.  If others have a different
> > > opinion on this feel free to comment here or on the JIRA.  I want to
> make
> > > sure we have the backing of the community on this.
> > >
> > >
> > > - Bobby
> > >
> > > On Wednesday, February 22, 2017, 10:35:29 AM CST, Bobby Evans
> > > <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID> wrote:I would be happy to give it a try.
> > > Like I said we are coming up on needing to push it back anyways.  Our
> > code
> > > is based off of 4.0.36.Final, but I can take a look at 4.1.x and see
> what
> > > differences there are with the API.
> > >
> > > - Bobby
> > >
> > > On Wednesday, February 22, 2017, 9:57:52 AM CST, Enrico Olivelli <
> > > eolive...@gmail.com> wrote:I'm using Netty 4.1.x for all of my
> projects
> > > and I am very +1 on the switch
> > > to Netty 4
> > >
> > > @Sijie what do you think ?
> > > If we all agree to switch to Netty 4 (I hope 4.1.x)  who can take care
> of
> > > the first port ?
> > >
> > >
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > > 2017-02-22 16:32 GMT+01:00 Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid>:
> > >
> > > > I really would like to get netty4 in sooner rather then later.
> Simply
> > > > because we have been running with it for quite a while in production
> so
> > > we
> > > > know it is relatively stable, and it is the basis of a lot of other
> > > patches
> > > > we want to push back.  Meaning we only have a handful of patches to
> > push
> > > > back before netty4 starts to make things much more difficult if not
> > > > impossible for other patches.  If we do want to wait until 4.6.x for
> > > netty4
> > > > then I would propose that we create a 4.5.x branch simply so we can
> > start
> > > > to move forward with netty4 on master.  I realize that a change this
> > big
> > > is
> > > > going to add more work to others too so I am open to other opinions.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > - Bobby
> > > >
> > > > On Wednesday, February 22, 2017, 9:22:39 AM CST, Enrico Olivelli <
> > > > eolive...@gmail.com> wrote:Hi all BookKeepers,
> > > > At the last community meeting JV reported that a Salesforce there is
> > some
> > > > work on SSL/TLS, in particular due to better performances using
> native
> > > > OpenSSL + netty 4.
> > > >
> > > > How the work is going ?
> > > >
> > > > Open questions are:
> > > >
> > > > 1) status of my current patch on SSL
> > > >
> > > > should I rebase, than get it merged and then continue the work from
> it
> > > > or JV and SF guys will pick up the work entirely ?
> > > >
> > > > 2) switch to Netty 4:
> > > > Initially we said that the switch to Netty 4 (from Yahoo and now from
> > > > Salesforce) could be skipped and done maybe for 4.6.x.
> > > >
> > > > What are your current thoughts ?
> > > >
> > > > -- Enrico
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jvrao
> > ---
> > First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then
> > you win. - Mahatma Gandhi
> >
>

Reply via email to