Pushed the resolution for FLINK-1103 and the streaming bugfix commit.

We are good for now on our side for an rc. Maybe I should add the streaming
connectors dependency fix that Stephan suggested here an the mailing list
soon.

Marton

On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Stephan Ewen <[email protected]> wrote:

> We can add it and keep it initially undocumented (experimental) until
> further tests...
>
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 10:40 PM, Robert Metzger <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > I would add #142.
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Stephan Ewen <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > I agree, having a release candidate out would be nice.
> > >
> > > What is your opinion on issue #142? Fault tolerance is inactive by
> > default,
> > > but can be activated through the configuration.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Robert Metzger <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Oh. I didn't know this. The last mail from Gyula sounded like the
> > > Streaming
> > > > part is ready2release.
> > > >
> > > > My personal goal was to prepare a release candiate today so that we
> > have
> > > a
> > > > reference point against which we can test (which would also mean
> > forking
> > > of
> > > > a 0.7-release branch and basically doing a feature freeze).
> > > > I also though that it might be a good idea to have a release
> candidate
> > by
> > > > tomorrow because it could be of use for the Hackathon tomorrow in
> > > > Stockholm.
> > > > But since the Scala POJO changes and the streaming examples are both
> > > > outstanding, we can probably scratch that.
> > > >
> > > > Doing a fork, release candidate and a feature freeze doesn't mean we
> > can
> > > > not supply bugfixes anymore for the 0.7-release ;)
> > > >
> > > > What is your best-case scenario for FLINK-1103? (as far as I can see
> > the
> > > > only outstanding streaming feature for the release)
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Robert
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 7:07 PM, Márton Balassi <
> > [email protected]
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > As for the streaming side we would like to push some bugfix commits
> > and
> > > > the
> > > > > resolution of the FLINK-1103 JIRA issue.
> > > > >
> > > > > These are more or less ready, hopefully will be available at the
> end
> > of
> > > > > this week.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 6:50 PM, Robert Metzger <
> [email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I've merged the record api deprecation already.
> > > > > > I'll merge #141 once Aljoscha provided his Scala changes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We certainly should merge #136 and #143 as well.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Fabian Hueske <
> [email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > So which PRs will be included in the candidate?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > #141 POJOs
> > > > > > > #144 Deprecate Record API
> > > > > > > #136 Fixed example quickstart
> > > > > > > #143(?) Hadoop Compat: Documentation + Hadoop function wrappers
> > > > > (includes
> > > > > > > PR #131)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2014-10-07 16:26 GMT+02:00 Stephan Ewen <[email protected]>:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Great news, looking forward to seeing this in the master!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Robert Metzger <
> > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > As an update for everyone: My POJO feature is finished,
> > > including
> > > > > > > > > documentation.
> > > > > > > > > Aljoscha is currently adopting the Scala API to have
> support
> > > for
> > > > > > > (nested)
> > > > > > > > > POJOs as well.
> > > > > > > > > Once that is done, I'll merge everything and create a first
> > > > > candidate
> > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > we can use for testing.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 10:49 PM, Fabian Hueske <
> > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I just checked the "Run Example" quickstart and it needs
> a
> > > bit
> > > > of
> > > > > > > work.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 2014-09-30 22:41 GMT+02:00 Robert Metzger <
> > > [email protected]
> > > > >:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm working hard on getting the POJOs ready.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > We also should do a pass over our documentation, the
> > > > > quickstarts
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > website to see if everything is in a good state (for
> > > example
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > collection-based execution needs documentation as
> well).
> > We
> > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > also
> > > > > > > > > > > finally document the hadoop-input format wrappers (I
> > think
> > > > Timo
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > working
> > > > > > > > > > > on a pull request for that).
> > > > > > > > > > > This page mentions the LocalDistributedExecutor and
> > > contains
> > > > > some
> > > > > > > > (most
> > > > > > > > > > > likely outdated) scala code:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://flink.incubator.apache.org/docs/0.7-incubating/local_execution.html
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > We also need to deprecate the old record api (
> > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1106).
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 9:17 PM, Stephan Ewen <
> > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I think we are approaching ready state.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Last issues are going in and we started working on
> > > > > dependencies
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > test
> > > > > > > > > > > > platform diversity in order to make stabilizing
> phase.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > We should have an official feature freeze soon and
> fork
> > > the
> > > > > > > > > 0.7-release
> > > > > > > > > > > > branch. I personally vote to include the POJO support
> > (I
> > > > > think
> > > > > > > > Robert
> > > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > > sorting that one out and is close to completion),
> and I
> > > > want
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > add
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > collection-based execution (today or tomorrow). Till
> > has
> > > > the
> > > > > > BLOB
> > > > > > > > > > manager
> > > > > > > > > > > > ready, which would be good to include (better support
> > > large
> > > > > > > > libraries
> > > > > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > > > > fat jars).
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > After that, I vote to freeze.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Gyula Fora <
> > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > So what is the current decision regarding the time
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > > > upcoming
> > > > > > > > > > > > release?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > As for the streaming component, we included all the
> > > > > features
> > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > > wanted,
> > > > > > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > > > > > will start to test everything tomorrow, making sure
> > > that
> > > > > all
> > > > > > > > works
> > > > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > > > > > intended.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > We are also almost finished with cleaning up the
> > > > connector
> > > > > > > > > > dependencies
> > > > > > > > > > > > > that Stephan pointed out, should be finished by
> > > tomorrow.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Gyula
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On 26 Sep 2014, at 10:49, Fabian Hueske <
> > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 to manage this on JIRA (if possible)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-09-26 10:40 GMT+02:00 Aljoscha Krettek <
> > > > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Can we not manage this stuff on Jira?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Stephan Ewen <
> > > > > > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> I personally like the idea of SOFT time-based
> > > feature
> > > > > > > > freezes.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Otherwise,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> releases will get delayed again and again,
> > because
> > > of
> > > > > > > > features
> > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> try
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> to squeeze in.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Having reached the freeze point already, we
> could
> > > > still
> > > > > > > > include
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> features that are pending ready state in the
> next
> > > > days
> > > > > > > > > > (streaming,
> > > > > > > > > > > > blob
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Manager, POJOs), but otherwise head for a
> release
> > > > > state.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> We had a mail listing the issues to include
> into
> > > 0.7,
> > > > > > but a
> > > > > > > > > wiki
> > > > > > > > > > > page
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> would
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> probably be better. In that sense, we could
> start
> > > > > > > collecting
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > issues
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> for
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> the next release from now on.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Am 26.09.2014 09:17 schrieb "Daniel Warneke" <
> > > > > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> I like Fabian's idea. Is there a wiki page (or
> > > > > something
> > > > > > > > > > similar)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > where
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> we
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> can collect the proposed JIRAs?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Best regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>    Daniel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Am 24.09.2014 23:03, schrieb Fabian Hueske:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> I agree, a hard feature stop deadline might
> not
> > > be
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > best
> > > > > > > > > > > > practice.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> How about the following procedure:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> We decide two (or three) weeks before a
> > targeted
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > date
> > > > > > > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> which
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> JIRAs to include. JIRAs that are selected
> for a
> > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> completed
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> or really close to completion (via progress
> > > > estimates
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > JIRA).
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> After we decided which JIRAs to include in a
> > > > release,
> > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > > use
> > > > > > > > > > > > JIRA
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> track the progress and dedicate another week
> > > > > > exclusively
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > > testing
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> after
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> the last feature was completed.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> 2014-09-24 19:10 GMT+02:00 Márton Balassi <
> > > > > > > > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> As for the streaming team we're also getting
> > > ready
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > release,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> but a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> couple of days will be needed to finish the
> > > > features
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > > > would
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> like
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> include.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>    - A little work is still needed for
> reduce
> > > > > > operations
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>    groups/connected streams (any comment on
> > > > Gyula's
> > > > > > > recent
> > > > > > > > > > > e-mail
> > > > > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> really
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>    appreciated :) )
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>    - The examples are being updated to match
> > the
> > > > > > > standard,
> > > > > > > > > > check
> > > > > > > > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>    WordCount. (
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > https://github.com/mbalassi/incubator-flink/blob/
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > streaming-new/flink-addons/flink-streaming/flink-
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > streaming-examples/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> streaming/examples/wordcount/WordCount.java
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> )
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>    Hopefully it gives you some deja vu. :)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Ufuk
> Celebi <
> > > > > > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On 24 Sep 2014, at 18:37, Robert Metzger <
> > > > > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Hey guys,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> exactly 3 weeks ago, we discussed to do a
> > > > feature
> > > > > > > freeze
> > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> 0.7-incubating release today.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> From our initial feature list:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> - *Flink Streaming* "Beta Preview". I
> would
> > > > > suggest
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > ship
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> streaming,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> but clearly mark it as a preview in the
> > > > > > documentation.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> -* Java API Pojo improvements*: Code
> > > generation,
> > > > > key
> > > > > > > > > > selection
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> using a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> string-expression:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1032
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>  - *Reworked Scala API*. Bring the Scala
> API
> > > in
> > > > > sync
> > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> latest
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> developments in the Java API:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-641
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>  -* Akka-based RPC service*:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1019
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>  - *Kryo-based serialization*. This
> feature
> > > has
> > > > > been
> > > > > > > > > > requested
> > > > > > > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> many
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> users. Mostly because they wanted to use
> > > > > Collections
> > > > > > > > > inside
> > > > > > > > > > > > POJOs:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-610
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> - Rework JobManager internals to support
> > > > > incremental
> > > > > > > > > program
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> rollout &
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> execution
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> - First parts of dynamic memory
> assignments
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> The following features are in the master,
> as
> > > of
> > > > > > today:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> - *Flink Streaming*
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> - *Reworked Scala API*
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> -* New Scheduler*
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> We certainly need some days to test
> > everything
> > > > > until
> > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > > > > start
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> vote.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Based on our experience with the last
> major
> > > > > > release, I
> > > > > > > > > would
> > > > > > > > > > > > > really
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> like
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> do the testing and bugfixing BEFORE the
> > first
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > > > candidate.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > For
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> 0.6-incubating release, we had 6
> candidates)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> How do you guys feel about this? Should we
> > > wait
> > > > a
> > > > > > few
> > > > > > > > more
> > > > > > > > > > > days
> > > > > > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> release so that a few more features make
> it
> > > into
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > release?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> I'm undecided on this. On the one hand,
> its
> > > > really
> > > > > > > nice
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> on a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> regular schedule, but it also eats up some
> > > time
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > > causes
> > > > > > > > > > > > > overhead
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> (different branches etc.).
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> I would really like to have the Java API
> > Pojo
> > > > > > > > improvements
> > > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> release.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> I think I can finish it until end of this
> > > week.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Opinions?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> I agree that the finished features
> > (especially
> > > > the
> > > > > > > Scala
> > > > > > > > > API)
> > > > > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> nice
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> for
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> a new release, but still I would like to
> > wait a
> > > > few
> > > > > > > more
> > > > > > > > > > days.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Some of the missing features are on the
> brink
> > > of
> > > > > > being
> > > > > > > > > > finished
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (e.g.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Pojo improvements). I wouldn't want to
> > invest a
> > > > > week
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > bug
> > > > > > > > > > > > fixing
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> doing the release vote, when the new
> features
> > > are
> > > > > > > likely
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> finished
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> just a few days afterwards. And the
> upcoming
> > > > > features
> > > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> definitely be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> worth a release, so users can work with
> them.
> > > ;)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to