I've closed my emails, so I didn't see your messages anymore Fabian. The RC1 for 1.3.1 is out now. I personally think we should not cancel it because of these two issues. If we find more stuff we can do it, but I would like to push out 1.3.1 soon to make the ES5 connector and the fixes to the state descriptors available.
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 11:22 AM, jincheng sun <sunjincheng...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi @Robert, > I agree with @Fabian. > And thanks for review those PRs. @Fabian. > > Cheers, > SunJincheng > > 2017-06-14 16:53 GMT+08:00 Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com>: > > > I don't think that > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6886 > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6896 > > > > are blockers but it would be good to include them. > > I'll try to review the PRs today and merge them. > > > > Cheers, Fabian > > > > 2017-06-13 11:48 GMT+02:00 Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org>: > > > > > I've just merged the fix for this blocker (FLINK-6685). > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Aljoscha Krettek < > aljos...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > A quick Jira search reveals one blocker: https://issues.apache.org/ > > > > jira/browse/FLINK-6685?filter=12334772&jql=project%20%3D% > > > > 20FLINK%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20Blocker%20AND%20resolution%20%3D% > > > > 20Unresolved%20AND%20affectedVersion%20%3D%201.3.0 < > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6685?filter= > > > > 12334772&jql=project%20=%20FLINK%20AND%20priority%20=% > > > > 20Blocker%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND% > > > > 20affectedVersion%20=%201.3.0> > > > > > > > > > On 13. Jun 2017, at 10:12, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I would like to include FLINK-6898 and FLINK-6900 in 1.3.1. > > > > > > > > > > They are related to the metric system, and limit the size of > > individual > > > > metric name components > > > > > as the default window operator names are so long they were causing > > > > issues with file-system based > > > > > storages because the components exceeded 255 characters. > > > > > > > > > > They both have open PRs and change 1 and 3 lines respectively, so > > it's > > > > very fast to review. > > > > > > > > > > On 13.06.2017 09:33, jincheng sun wrote: > > > > >> Hi Robert, > > > > >> From user mail-list I find 2 bugs as follows: > > > > >> > > > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6886 > > > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6896 > > > > >> > > > > >> I'm not sure if they are as the release blocker. But I think is > > better > > > > to > > > > >> merged those two PR. into 1.3.1 release. > > > > >> What do you think? @Fabian, @Timo, @Robert > > > > >> > > > > >> Best, > > > > >> SunJincheng > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> 2017-06-13 14:03 GMT+08:00 Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai < > tzuli...@apache.org > > >: > > > > >> > > > > >>> I’ve just merged the last blockers for 1.3.1. IMO, the release > > > process > > > > for > > > > >>> 1.3.1 is ready for kick off. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On 8 June 2017 at 10:32:47 AM, Aljoscha Krettek ( > > aljos...@apache.org > > > ) > > > > >>> wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Yes, there is a workaround, as mentioned in the other thread: > > > > >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ > > eb7e256146fbe069a4210e1690fac5 > > > > >>> d3453208fab61515ab1a2f6bf7@%3Cuser.flink.apache.org%3E < > > > > >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ > > eb7e256146fbe069a4210e1690fac5 > > > > >>> d3453208fab61515ab1a2f6bf7@%3Cuser.flink.apache.org%3E>. It’s > > just a > > > > bit > > > > >>> cumbersome but I agree that it’s not a blocker now. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Best, > > > > >>> Aljoscha > > > > >>>> On 8. Jun 2017, at 09:47, Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> There should be an easy work-around for this problem. Start a > > > > standalone > > > > >>>> cluster and run the queries against this cluster. But I also see > > > that > > > > it > > > > >>>> might be annoying for users who used to do it differently. The > > basic > > > > >>>> question here should be whether we want the users to use the > > > > >>>> LocalFlinkMiniCluster in a remote setting (running queries > against > > > it > > > > >>> from > > > > >>>> a different process). > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Cheers, > > > > >>>> Till > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Aljoscha Krettek < > > > aljos...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > >>>> wrote: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>> I would also like to raise another potential blocker: it’s > > > currently > > > > not > > > > >>>>> easily possible for users to start a job in local mode in the > IDE > > > > and to > > > > >>>>> then interact with that cluster, say for experimenting with > > > queryable > > > > >>>>> state. At least one user walked into this problem already with > > the > > > > 1.3.0 > > > > >>>>> RC: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ > > > > eb7e256146fbe069a4210e1690fac5 > > > > >>>>> d3453208fab61515ab1a2f6bf7@%3Cuser.flink.apache.org%3E < > > > > >>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ > > > eb7e256146fbe069a4210e1690fac5 > > > > >>>>> d3453208fab61515ab1a2f6bf7@%3Cuser.flink.apache.org%3E> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> The reasons I have so far analysed are: > > > > >>>>> * the local flink cluster starts with HAServices that don’t > allow > > > > >>>>> external querying, by default. (Broadly spoken) > > > > >>>>> * the queryable state server is not started in the local flink > > mini > > > > >>>>> cluster anymore and it cannot be configured to do so easily > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> What do you think? > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> Best, > > > > >>>>> Aljoscha > > > > >>>>>> On 7. Jun 2017, at 11:54, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org > > > > > > wrote: > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> From the list [1], not many of the JIRAs have been fixed. > > > > >>>>>> I think it would be nice to put the RC for 1.3.1 out this > week, > > > > given > > > > >>>>> that > > > > >>>>>> multiple users have complained about some issues in the 1.3.0 > > > > release. > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> [1] > > > > >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=labels%20%3D% > > > > >>>>> 20flink-rel-1.3.1-blockers > > > > >>>>>> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai < > > > > >>>>> tzuli...@apache.org> > > > > >>>>>> wrote: > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> After an offline discussion with Till, we decided to not > > include > > > > >>>>>>> FLINK-6763 and FLINK-6764 as blockers for 1.3.1, and only > merge > > > > them > > > > >>> for > > > > >>>>>>> 1.4.0 since they change serialization formats for > checkpoints. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> In turn, I’ve included https://issues.apache.org/ > > > > >>> jira/browse/FLINK-6804 > > > > >>>>> as > > > > >>>>>>> a 1.3.1 blocker. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> On 2 June 2017 at 5:27:18 PM, Nico Kruber ( > > > n...@data-artisans.com) > > > > >>>>> wrote: > > > > >>>>>>> while fixing build issues - what about FLINK-6654? > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> On Friday, 2 June 2017 11:05:34 CEST Robert Metzger wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>> Hi devs, > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> I would like to release Apache Flink 1.3.1 with the > following > > > > fixes: > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> - FLINK-6812 Elasticsearch 5 release artifacts not published > > to > > > > Maven > > > > >>>>>>>> central > > > > >>>>>>>> - FLINK-6783 Wrongly extracted TypeInformations for > > > > >>>>>>>> WindowedStream::aggregate > > > > >>>>>>>> - FLINK-6780 ExternalTableSource should add time attributes > in > > > the > > > > >>> row > > > > >>>>>>> type > > > > >>>>>>>> - FLINK-6775 StateDescriptor cannot be shared by multiple > > > subtasks > > > > >>>>>>>> - FLINK-6763 Inefficient PojoSerializerConfigSnapshot > > > > serialization > > > > >>>>>>> format > > > > >>>>>>>> - FLINK-6764 Deduplicate stateless TypeSerializers when > > > > serializing > > > > >>>>>>>> composite TypeSerializers > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> Is there anything else that we need to wait for before we > vote > > > on > > > > the > > > > >>>>>>> first > > > > >>>>>>>> RC? > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> Regards, > > > > >>>>>>>> Robert > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
