Hi Stephan, How soon are you expecting the "release-1.2" fork? I am sure you have considered merging the FLIP-6 branch after the fork.
Do we anticipate the new tests pushing Flink over Travis CI's new 50 minute limit? This might be a good opportunity to rebalance the test ranges as the most recent passing master build ( https://travis-ci.org/apache/flink/builds/180504091) shows up to a 10 minute difference in runtime. Greg On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi all! > > I want to start a discussion about merging the FLIP-6 feature branch into > the master branch. > > The feature branch implements the following: > - A new RPC abstraction > - A new High-Availability Services Abstraction > - New JobManager / TaskManager / ResourceManager with dynamic slot > allocation > - Re-designed runners to instantiate them > - A new MiniCluster > > The feature branch still needs quite a bit of work, but it does not > interfere with the current state of the master branch. All new components > are implemented as separate components with separate tests. > > The branch builds fully, all tests pass, and when setting up Flink by any > of the means supported in the Master, the same code is used and none of the > feature branch code is active. > > > At the same time, it becomes harder for the feature branch to chase the > master branch. > Also, the feature branch starts to contain cleanups that are valuable in > the master branch as well, for example around reusable parts like the "high > availability services". > > > *My suggestion is the following:* > > - Let's merge the feature branch in the near future, i.e., quite soon. > > - When we fork off the "release-1.2" branch, we delete the new components > form that branch. That way we avoid having seemingly dead code in the > source release. > > - The feature branch classes are mostly in some subpackages, so it should > be quite straight forward to remove them. > > > What do you think about this? > > > Greetings, > Stephan >
