+1 from my side to have smaller and more frequent feature releases for the
project in its early phases.

Best,
Congxian


Marta Paes Moreira <ma...@ververica.com> 于2020年5月21日周四 下午12:49写道:

> +1 for more frequent releases with a shorter (but feedback-informed)
> feature set.
>
> Thanks, Gordon (and Igal)!
>
> Marta
>
> On Thu, 21 May 2020 at 03:44, Yu Li <car...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1, it makes a lot of sense for stateful functions to evolve faster.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Yu
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 20 May 2020 at 23:36, Zhijiang <wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com
> > .invalid>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I also like this idea, considering stateful functions flexible enough
> to
> > > have a faster release cycle. +1 from my side.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Zhijiang
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > From:Seth Wiesman <sjwies...@gmail.com>
> > > Send Time:2020年5月20日(星期三) 21:45
> > > To:dev <dev@flink.apache.org>
> > > Subject:Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing Stateful Functions 2.1.0 soon?
> > >
> > > +1 for a fast release cycle
> > >
> > > Seth
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 8:43 AM Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I like the idea of releasing Statefun more frequently to have faster
> > > > feedback cycles!
> > > >
> > > > No objections for releasing 2.1.0 from my side.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 2:22 PM Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai <
> > tzuli...@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi devs,
> > > > >
> > > > > Since Stateful Functions 2.0 was released early April,
> > > > > we've been getting some good feedback from various channels,
> > > > > including the Flink mailing lists, JIRA issues, as well as Stack
> > > Overflow
> > > > > questions.
> > > > >
> > > > > Some of the discussions have actually translated into new features
> > > > > currently being implemented into the project, such as:
> > > > >
> > > > >    - State TTL for the state primitives in Stateful Functions (for
> > both
> > > > >    embedded/remote functions)
> > > > >    - Transport for remote functions via UNIX domain sockets, which
> > > would
> > > > be
> > > > >    useful when remote functions are co-located with Flink StateFun
> > > > workers
> > > > >    (i.e. the "sidecar" deployment mode)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Besides that, some critical shortcomings have already been
> addressed
> > > > since
> > > > > the last release:
> > > > >
> > > > >    - After upgrading to Flink 1.10.1, failure recovery in Stateful
> > > > >    Functions now works properly with the new scheduler.
> > > > >    - Support for concurrent checkpoints
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > With these ongoing threads, while it's only been just short of 2
> > months
> > > > > since the last release,
> > > > > we (Igal Shilman and I) have been thinking about aiming to already
> > > start
> > > > > the next feature release (2.1.0) soon.
> > > > > This is relatively shorter than the release cycle of what the
> > community
> > > > is
> > > > > used to in Flink (usually 3 months at least),
> > > > > but we think with the StateFun project in its early phases, having
> > > > smaller
> > > > > and more frequent feature releases could potentially help drive
> user
> > > > > adoption.
> > > > >
> > > > > So, what do you think about setting feature freeze for StateFun
> 2.1.0
> > > by
> > > > > next Wednesday (May 27th)?
> > > > > Of course, whether or not to actually have another feature release
> > > > already
> > > > > is still an open discussion - if you prefer a richer feature
> release
> > > with
> > > > > more features included besides the ones listed above, please do
> > > comment!
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Gordon
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to