+1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker. On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi.liu....@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 especially on DL-23. > > - Xi > > On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <khurrumnas...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > I am also interested in participating. > > > > - kn > > > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > I'd like to start the discussion about the first release. There are > > still a > > > few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need to pick > > up a > > > few items and cut the first release and then iterate from there. Here > is > > a > > > list of items that I think we should include: > > > > > > - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>: Repackaging > > namespace > > > to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing) > > > - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support scala > > 2.10 > > > and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged) > > > - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move DL to > depend > > > on > > > central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift version, > > which > > > is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request out. > > > > > > I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2 > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the official > > > bookkeeper > > > version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new release > once > > > that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure between DL > and > > > BK. > > > > > > Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be > included > > in > > > the first release. > > > > > > Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager for first > > > release? > > > > > > - Sijie > > > > > > -- -franck
