It does make sense, Sijie, thanks for the update. -Flavio
> On 17 Nov 2016, at 05:12, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote: > > Flavio, > > I totally agreed that not using an official Apache version is not great > for the community. We had a bookkeeper meetup last night. We've discussed > the current situation with the community. We came to a commitment to merge > Twitter's branch back into bookkeeper 4.5. After that we won't maintain our > own branch and switch to 4.5. > > Hope this make sense. > > Sijie > > On Nov 16, 2016 8:04 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <f...@apache.org> wrote: > > It isn't great that DistributedLog is not using the Apache BookKeeper > release. Essentially anyone using DistributedLog today needs to use the > Twitter branch of BookKeeper, which has diverged from Apache BookKeeper. > I'm sure the changes in the Twitter branch are all great, but I'd be more > comfortable being able to rely on the Apache BookKeeper releases, which are > community driven. > > I'm not going to block the release on this alone because it is important > for this project to get a first release out soon, but we need to fix DL-2. > > -Flavio > >> On 15 Nov 2016, at 19:02, Leigh Stewart <lstew...@twitter.com.INVALID> > wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <franck.c...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >>> +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 >>>
