+1 from my side. Cheers, Till
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 9:52 AM, Piotr Nowojski <pi...@data-artisans.com> wrote: > +0.95 from my side. > > Network changes are mostly reviewed and should be merged by the end of > this week. > > Piotrek > > > On 12 Feb 2018, at 17:41, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > I agree with the basic idea. I think there is no need to call it "soft > > feature freeze" though - it is a feature freeze (no new features get > > merged) ;-) > > > > What you are suggesting is to delay forking of the release-1.5 branch to > > avoid applying the bug fixes to too many branches. That makes sense. > > In effect, there is a period of one week (next week) where no post 1.5 > > features can be merged (feature freeze but release branch not forked), > > which should be okay. > > > > Best, > > Stephan > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 3:00 PM, Kostas Kloudas < > k.klou...@data-artisans.com > >> wrote: > > > >> For me as well +1. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Kostas > >> > >>> On Feb 12, 2018, at 2:59 PM, Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> Sounds good to me. +1 from my side. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Timo > >>> > >>> > >>> Am 2/12/18 um 2:56 PM schrieb Aljoscha Krettek: > >>>> I agree with Chesnay: we should do a soft "feature freeze" first, were > >> we agree to not merge new features to master after that and then to the > >> actual hard cutting of the release branch a while later. > >>>> > >>>> For actual dates, I'm proposing end of this week (16.02.2018) as soft > >> feature freeze and end of next week (23.02.2018) as the hard cut of the > >> release branch? > >>>> > >>>> What do you think? > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Aljoscha > >>>> > >>>>> On 8. Feb 2018, at 10:15, Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Local state recovery is almost completely done. Only some reviews and > >>>>> merging of the final PRs is pending. > >>>>> > >>>>> The network stack improvements are on a good way to be finished by > the > >> end > >>>>> of this week or beginning of next week. To my knowledge we got > recently > >>>>> green Travis builds :-) The network stack changes will also include > the > >>>>> application level flow control and the back pressure based checkpoint > >>>>> alignment. So only the last reviews and merging is missing. > >>>>> > >>>>> Concerning Flip-6, I'm currently working on enabling Flip-6 by > default. > >>>>> There are still some smaller things left to be done but I'm confident > >> that > >>>>> we can resolve them quickly. > >>>>> > >>>>> I agree that due to the big changes we should have a very thorough > and > >>>>> principled testing period where we put Flink through the paces. > >>>>> > >>>>> Cheers, > >>>>> Till > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 10:55 AM, Chesnay Schepler < > ches...@apache.org> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> As Aljoscha said we wanted to do 1.5 soon after 1.4 based on the > >>>>>> assumption that the 3 big features (FLIP-6, network stack changes, > >> local > >>>>>> state recovery) are nearly done. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'm unsure about local state recovery, but I still see open issues > for > >>>>>> FLIP-6 and the network stack rework. > >>>>>> As such it doesn't make sense to release 1.5 now. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Given the large scope of these features I would very much prefer to > >> have > >>>>>> them active on master for a while before a feature-freeze > >>>>>> to expose them to a wider audience. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> IMO it will take at least another month before we can start the > >> release > >>>>>> process for 1.5, i.e. the feature freeze. > >>>>>> (2 more weeks for implementation, 2 weeks on master for the dust to > >> settle) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 05.02.2018 22:39, Kostas Kloudas wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Aljoscha, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I believe that support for Broadcast State should also be in 1.5. > >>>>>>> There is an open PR https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/5230 < > >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/5230> for that > >>>>>>> and there are some pending issues related to scala api and > >> documentation. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>> Kostas > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Feb 5, 2018, at 5:37 PM, Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org> > wrote: > >>>>>>>> Hi Shuyi, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I will take a look at it again this week. I'm pretty sure it will > be > >>>>>>>> part of 1.5.0. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>> Timo > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Am 2/5/18 um 5:25 PM schrieb Shuyi Chen: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi Aljoscha, can we get this feature in for 1.5.0? We have a lot > of > >>>>>>>>> internal users waiting for this feature. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> [FLINK-7923 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7923>] > >> Support > >>>>>>>>> accessing subfields of a Composite element in an Object Array > type > >>>>>>>>> column > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Thanks a lot > >>>>>>>>> Shuyi > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 6:59 AM, Christophe Jolif < > cjo...@gmail.com > >>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi guys, > >>>>>>>>>> Sorry for jumping in, but I think > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> [FLINK-8101] Elasticsearch 6.X support > >>>>>>>>>> [FLINK-7386] Flink Elasticsearch 5 connector is not compatible > >> with > >>>>>>>>>> Elasticsearch 5.2+ client > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> have long been awaited and there was one PR from me and from > >> someone > >>>>>>>>>> else > >>>>>>>>>> showing the interest ;) So if you could consider it for 1.5 that > >> would > >>>>>>>>>> be > >>>>>>>>>> great! > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks! > >>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>> Christophe > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 2:47 PM, Timo Walther < > twal...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hi Aljoscha, > >>>>>>>>>>> it would be great if we can include the first version of the > SQL > >>>>>>>>>>> client > >>>>>>>>>>> (see FLIP-24, Implementation Plan 1). I will open a PR this > >> week. I > >>>>>>>>>>> think > >>>>>>>>>>> we can merge this with explicit "experimental/alpha" status. It > >> is far > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> away > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> from feature completeness but will be a great tool for Flink > >>>>>>>>>>> beginners. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> In order to use the SQL client we would need to also add some > >> table > >>>>>>>>>>> sources with the new unified table factories (FLINK-8535), but > >> this is > >>>>>>>>>>> optional because a user can implement own table factories at > the > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> begining. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>>>>> Timo > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Am 2/5/18 um 2:36 PM schrieb Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Aljoscha, > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for starting the discussion. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I think there’s a few connector related must-have improvements > >> that > >>>>>>>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>>>> should get in before the feature freeze, since quite a few > >> users have > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> been > >>>>>>>>>>> asking for them: > >>>>>>>>>>>> [FLINK-6352] FlinkKafkaConsumer should support to use > timestamp > >> to > >>>>>>>>>>>> set > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> up > >>>>>>>>>>> start offset > >>>>>>>>>>>> [FLINK-5479] Per-partition watermarks in FlinkKafkaConsumer > >> should > >>>>>>>>>>>> consider idle partitions > >>>>>>>>>>>> [FLINK-8516] Pluggable shard-to-subtask partitioning for > >>>>>>>>>>>> FlinkKinesisConsumer > >>>>>>>>>>>> [FLINK-6109] Add a “checkpointed offset” metric to > >> FlinkKafkaConsumer > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> These are still missing in the master branch. Only FLINK-5479 > is > >>>>>>>>>>>> still > >>>>>>>>>>>> lacking a pull request. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>>>>> Gordon > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On 31 January 2018 at 10:38:43 AM, Aljoscha Krettek ( > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> aljos...@apache.org) > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Everyone, > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> When we decided to do the 1.4.0 release a while back we did > >> that to > >>>>>>>>>>>> get > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>>>>> stable release out before putting in a couple of new features. > >> Back > >>>>>>>>>>> then, > >>>>>>>>>>> some of those new features (FLIP-6, network stack changes, > local > >> state > >>>>>>>>>>>> recovery) were almost ready and we wanted to do a shortened > >> 1.5.0 > >>>>>>>>>>>> development cycle to allow for those features to become ready > >> and > >>>>>>>>>>>> then > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> do > >>>>>>>>>>> the next release. > >>>>>>>>>>>> We are now approaching the approximate time where we wanted to > >> do the > >>>>>>>>>>>> Flink 1.5.0 release so I would like to gauge where we are and > >> gather > >>>>>>>>>>>> opinions on how we should proceed now. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> With this, I'd also like to propose myself as the release > >> manager for > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.5.0 but I'm very happy to yield if someone else would be > >>>>>>>>>>>> interested in > >>>>>>>>>>>> doing that. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think? > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>>> Aljoscha > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>> Christophe > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >
