No, I meant that if we include FLINK-6921 / FLINK-6948 in 1.3.1, we also still 
need to bump the version due to changes in FLINK-6948.
So, that the version needs to be bumped would not be a reason to block 1.3.1 on 
it, because we have to do it either way.

On 19 June 2017 at 7:33:25 PM, Till Rohrmann (trohrm...@apache.org) wrote:

Do you mean that we have to bump the version also without including  
FLINK-6921 and FLINK-6948? Wouldn't that be a release blocker then?  

I think that we actually introduced FLINK-6921 with [1]. Thus, the  
`ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException` is specific to this release. However, I  
agree that the serializer was broken before as well, however, in a  
different way.  

[1]  
https://github.com/apache/flink/commit/5281dd6598f17c8dfe0c7b091c90c8721d305375 
 

Cheers,  
Till  

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai <tzuli...@apache.org>  
wrote:  

> The ScalaEnumSerializerConfigSnapshot would need a version bump  
> regardless of whether or not the fixes are included in 1.3.1.  
> In other words, we still need to bump the version if we include it for  
> 1.3.1.  
>  
> I’m not against including FLINK-6921 and FLINK-6948 in for 1.3.1, but then  
> as usual the argument would be that the problem had always been there and  
> is not specific to this release.  
> I’m personally usually favorable of delaying the release a bit more to get  
> fixes for issues we know of in.  
>  
> I’ll look at the PRs for FLINK-6921 and FLINK-6948 now, and merge them  
> soon. We could probably have a RC2 with a shorter vote duration?  
>  
> Best,  
> Gordon  
>  
> On 19 June 2017 at 7:10:11 PM, Till Rohrmann (trohrm...@apache.org) wrote:  
>  
> I think the EnumValueSerializer [1, 2] is broken in the current RC. This  
> basically means that Flink programs won’t properly notice that state  
> migration is required and or fail with obscure exceptions at migration  
> check or runtime.  
>  
> This definitely will be enough reason for another bug fix release if we  
> don’t want to include fixes in 1.3.1. If we include the fixes in 1.3.2,  
> then this will require a version bump for the  
> ScalaEnumSerializerConfigSnapshot because we have to change the format.  
> This also entails code for backwards compatibility.  
>  
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6921  
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6948  
>  
> Cheers,  
> Till  
> ​  
>  
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Dawid Wysakowicz <  
> wysakowicz.da...@gmail.com> wrote:  
>  
> > +1  
> >  
> > - built from source (2.10, 2.11)  
> > - checked aggregate function with AggregateFunction return type different  
> > than stream type  
> >  
> > Z pozdrowieniami! / Cheers!  
> >  
> > Dawid Wysakowicz  
> >  
> > *Data/Software Engineer*  
> >  
> > Skype: dawid_wys | Twitter: @OneMoreCoder  
> >  
> > <http://getindata.com/>  
> >  
> > 2017-06-19 7:15 GMT+02:00 Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai <tzuli...@apache.org>:  
> >  
> > > +1  
> > >  
> > > Tested the following blockers of 1.3.1:  
> > >  
> > > Serializers & checkpointing  
> > > - Verified Scala jobs using Scala types as state (Scala collections,  
> case  
> > > classes, Either, Try, etc.) can restore from savepoints taken with  
> Flink  
> > > 1.2.1 & 1.3.1. Tested with Scala 2.10 & 2.11.  
> > > - Tested restore of POJO types as state, behavior & error messages for  
> > > changed POJO types consistent across different state backends  
> > > - Tested stream join with checkpointing enabled  
> > > - Sharing static state descriptor (w/ stateful KryoSerializer) across  
> > > tasks did not reveal any issues  
> > >  
> > > Elasticsearch connector  
> > > - ES 5 connector artifacts exists in staging repo  
> > > - Tested cluster execution with ES sink (2.3.5, 2.4.1, 5.1.2), no  
> > > dependency conflicts, successful  
> > >  
> > > Flink CEP  
> > > - Out-of-order matched events is now resolved  
> > >  
> > > - Ran local build + test on MacOS (-Dscala-2.10, -Dscala-2.11),  
> > successful  
> > > - LICENSES untouched since 1.3.0  
> > > - No new dependencies  
> > >  
> > > Best,  
> > > Gordon  
> > >  
> > > On 14 June 2017 at 10:14:39 PM, Robert Metzger (rmetz...@apache.org)  
> > > wrote:  
> > >  
> > > Dear Flink community,  
> > >  
> > > Please vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache Flink  
> version  
> > > 1.3.1.  
> > >  
> > > The commit to be voted on:  
> > > http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/flink/commit/7cfe62b9  
> > >  
> > > Branch:  
> > > release-1.3.1-rc1  
> > >  
> > > The release artifacts to be voted on can be found at:  
> > > *http://people.apache.org/~rmetzger/flink-1.3.1-rc1/  
> > > <http://people.apache.org/~rmetzger/flink-1.3.1-rc1/>*  
> > >  
> > > The release artifacts are signed with the key with fingerprint  
> D9839159:  
> > > http://www.apache.org/dist/flink/KEYS  
> > >  
> > > The staging repository for this release can be found at:  
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheflink-1124  
> > >  
> > >  
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------  
> > >  
> > >  
> > > The vote ends on Monday (5pm CEST), June 19rd, 2016.  
> > >  
> > > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Flink 1.3.1  
> > > [ ] -1 Do not release this package, because ...  
> > >  
> >  
>  

Reply via email to