Hi Aljoscha, thanks a lot for resolving this last big release blocker! I'll definitively fork off in the release branch in the next few hours. Stephan asked me to wait for a few more minutes for his maven changes.
The JIRAs you've mentioned seem to be pretty isolated, so its fine to merge them afterwards to both branches. Regards, Robert On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> wrote: > I just merged the most important backwards compatibility changes, with > tests. > > I think this one is still a blocker: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5320 (WindowedStream.fold() > cannot be used). And this one is a potential blocker for some users: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5363. > > IMHO, we can cut the branch today and I'll get them in on master and both > the 1.2 branch. What do you think? > > On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 at 15:24 Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Quick update here: I talked to Aljoscha offline, and the backwards > > compatibility is still being tested (there were some bugs identified > while > > writing the tests). > > > > Also, Stephan made some fixes to the build infrastructure ( > > https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3029) that would be good to be > > included into the release branch. > > To finally get the FLIP-6 branch merged to master, I'm considering > > branching off the 1.2 release later today. It will be a little bit more > > overhead for Stephan and Aljoscha, but it will unblock all features > waiting > > for a Flink 1.3 master. > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > Thank you Aljoscha and Fabian for the updates. > > > I propose *Monday evening (6pm Berlin, 9am US west coast) for feature > > > freezing Flink 1.2 *then. This means that I'll create a release-1.2 > fork > > > and create a 1.2 RC0 (non-voting) release candidate for testing. > > > > > > I don't think that I'll create the first (voting) RC until January > > because > > > of christmas and new years activities. Most of the committers I know > are > > > out of office during these 1,5 weeks. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 5:55 PM, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> I merged the Table API refactoring changes: > > >> > > >> - RESOLVED Clean up the packages of the Table API (FLINK-4704) > > >> - RESOLVED Move Row to flink-core (FLINK-5186) > > >> > > >> No blockers left from my side. > > >> > > >> Cheers, Fabian > > >> > > >> 2016-12-16 17:47 GMT+01:00 Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>: > > >> > > >> > Yes, I'm confident that we can finish the tests until then and merge > > the > > >> > code. > > >> > > > >> > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 17:41 Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > Thank you for the update. Do you think you get it done until > Monday > > >> > > evening? > > >> > > > > >> > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Aljoscha Krettek < > > >> aljos...@apache.org> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > Hi, > > >> > > > we're still working on making the backwards compatibility from > 1.1 > > >> > > > savepoints a reality. We have most of the code and some tests > now > > >> but > > >> > it > > >> > > > still needs some work. This is the issue that tracks the > progress > > on > > >> > the > > >> > > > operators that we would like to make backwards compatible: > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5292 > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Cheers, > > >> > > > Aljoscha > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 at 11:22 Feng Wang <feng.w...@outlook.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > It will be pretty good if 1.2 branch could be forked off > within > > >> this > > >> > > > week, > > >> > > > > and our guys working on FLIP-6 hope FLIP-6 branch could be > > merged > > >> > into > > >> > > > > master as soon as possible. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Best Regards, > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Feng Wang > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Alibaba > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > ________________________________ > > >> > > > > From: Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > > >> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 4:58 AM > > >> > > > > To: dev@flink.apache.org > > >> > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Schedule and Scope for Flink 1.2 > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Thank you all for figuring out a solution for the security > pull > > >> > > request. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Lets try to get 1.2 feature freezed as fast as possible so > that > > we > > >> > can > > >> > > > > "unblock" waiting features like FLIP-6 and the remaining > > security > > >> > > > changes. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > *What do you think about Friday evening (6pm Berlin, 9am US > west > > >> > coast) > > >> > > > for > > >> > > > > feature freezing Flink 1.2?* (only bugfixes are allowed in > > >> > afterwards) > > >> > > > > I'll then fork-off a "release-1.2" branch and update the > version > > >> in > > >> > > > > "master" to 1.3-SNAPSHOT. > > >> > > > > Please object if you have a bigger change or any other > > >> reservations > > >> > > > > regarding the feature freeze date! > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > This is my current view of things on the release: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > - RESOLVED dynamic Scaling / Key Groups (FLINK-3755) > > >> > > > > - RESOLVED Add Rescalable Non-Partitioned State (FLINK-4379) > > >> > > > > - UNRESOLVED Add Flink 1.1 savepoint backwards compatability > > >> > > (FLINK-4797) > > >> > > > > - RESOLVED [Split for 1.3] Integrate Flink with Apache Mesos > > >> > > (FLINK-1984) > > >> > > > > - UNDER DISCUSSION Secure Data Access (FLINK-3930) > > >> > > > > - RESOLVED Queryable State (FLINK-3779) > > >> > > > > - RESOLVED Metrics in Webinterface (FLINK-4389) > > >> > > > > - RESOLVED Kafka 0.10 support (FLINK-4035) > > >> > > > > - RESOLVED Table API: Group Window Aggregates (FLINK-4691, > > >> FLIP-11) > > >> > > > > - RESOLVED Table API: Scalar Functions (FLINK-3097) > > >> > > > > Added by Stephan: > > >> > > > > - NON-BLOCKING [Pending PR] Provide support for asynchronous > > >> > operations > > >> > > > > over streams (FLINK-4391) > > >> > > > > - NON-BLOCKING [beginning of next week] Unify Savepoints and > > >> > > Checkpoints > > >> > > > > (FLINK-4484) > > >> > > > > Added by Fabian: > > >> > > > > - ONGOING [Pending PR] Clean up the packages of the Table API > > >> > > > (FLINK-4704) > > >> > > > > Move Row to flink-core ( > > >> > > > > Added by Max: > > >> > > > > - ONGOING [Pending PR] Change Akka configuration to allow > > >> accessing > > >> > > > actors > > >> > > > > from different URLs (FLINK-2821) > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 5:43 PM, Stephan Ewen < > se...@apache.org > > > > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Hi Vijay! > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > The workaround you suggest may be doable, but I am wondering > > how > > >> > much > > >> > > > > that > > >> > > > > > helps, because the authorization feature would be incomplete > > >> like > > >> > > that > > >> > > > > and > > >> > > > > > thus of limited use. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > I would also assume that merging it properly and in full use > > >> after > > >> > > the > > >> > > > > 1.2 > > >> > > > > > release would be a bit better - in general, we have often > > >> avoided > > >> > > last > > >> > > > > > minute additions of sensitive and complex features. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Do you think it is more urgent to have this in Flink? > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Best, > > >> > > > > > Stephan > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Vijay > > >> > <vijikar...@yahoo.com.invalid > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Max and Ufuk, I respect your concerns and fully understand > > the > > >> > > > > importance > > >> > > > > > > of the network layer stack in Flink code base. Will you be > > >> > > > comfortable > > >> > > > > to > > >> > > > > > > merge the code if I remove the Netty layer changes and > leave > > >> the > > >> > > rest > > >> > > > > of > > >> > > > > > > the code. We can address the Netty code changes post 1.2 > > >> release? > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Regards, > > >> > > > > > > Vijay > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 2016, at 3:38 AM, Ufuk Celebi < > u...@apache.org> > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On 12 December 2016 at 12:30:31, Maximilian Michels ( > > >> > > > m...@apache.org) > > >> > > > > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > >>> It seems like we lack the resources for now to > properly > > to > > >> > take > > >> > > > > > > >> care > > >> > > > > > > >> of your pull request before the release. Unless someone > > >> from > > >> > > > > > > >> the > > >> > > > > > > >> community is really eager to help out here, I would be > in > > >> > favor > > >> > > > > > > >> of > > >> > > > > > > >> merging the pull request to the master after the > release > > >> > branch > > >> > > > > > > >> has > > >> > > > > > > >> been forked off. We should make sure it gets the > > attention > > >> it > > >> > > > > deserves > > >> > > > > > > >> then. > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks Max! I fully agree with your reasoning. +1 to not > > >> > include > > >> > > > this > > >> > > > > > in > > >> > > > > > > 1.2 now, but look at it afterwards. I hope that OK with > you > > >> > Vijay. > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > - Ufuk > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
