Hi Helmut,
As long as the integration tests still pass and the packaging issues are
not exacerbated, I don't see why we couldn't merge an upgrade patch,
barring any serious concerns with the patch.

Mike

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 1:47 AM, Wahrmann, Helmut <helmut.wahrm...@rsa.com>
wrote:

> Hi Mike,
>
> I won't have a problem upgrading the Solr sink to the latest version.
> I am missing test environment however.
> So while it may build correctly and all integration tests work, I have no
> real environment to test with.
>
> best regards,
> Helmut
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Percy [mailto:mpe...@apache.org]
> Sent: Mittwoch, 14. Februar 2018 00:38
> To: dev@flume.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Merge of patch in Flume-3021?
>
> OK. In the pull request, it would be nice if whoever submits or merges it
> mentions all of the contributors to the patch in the commit message.
>
> I asked Wolfgang H. about the SolrServer thing and this is what he told me:
>
> Hi Mike, the class has been renamed to "SolrClient" (which unfortunately
> > breaks compat). It's just a class rename. The functionality is the
> > same as before. It was called SolrServer in Solr4 because it was a
> > client proxy that sends RPCs to a Solr server, but calling it
> > SolrClient is more straightforward to understand, hence the community
> > decided to rename the class.
> > It's possible to spawn an embedded Solr server, for example for
> > testing purposes, via class EmbeddedSolrServer (a class that retains
> > the same name in Solr7 and Solr4), which extends the SolrClient class.
>
>
> Hope this helps,
> Mike
>
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 4:41 AM, Wahrmann, Helmut <helmut.wahrm...@rsa.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Mike,
> >
> > Thanks for the response. Would be cool if we get that sorted out.
> >
> > I've asked Yonghao Zou to submit the Pull Request, since he did most
> > of the work and should get the credit.
> > He'll  do so after the Chinese New Year's Eve.
> >
> > I will then issue a Pull request for the new ES Rest client, which is
> > dependent on the above work.
> >
> > best regards,
> > Helmut
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mike Percy [mailto:mpe...@apache.org]
> > Sent: Dienstag, 13. Februar 2018 04:30
> > To: dev@flume.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Merge of patch in Flume-3021?
> >
> > Hi Helmut,
> > I see that I neglected to follow up on the other thread on this topic
> > after your reply about SolrServer missing from the solrj jar. Let me
> > ask around w/ some folks I know that work on Solr and see if there is
> > any way to retain the SolrServer for our tests after upgrading to the
> new version.
> >
> > Thank you very much for working on upgrading Solr. Would you mind
> > submitting a pull request with your (apparently work-in-progress)
> > patch to upgrade both Solr and ES?
> >
> > To reply to your email in this thread, the JAR packaging situation is
> > largely the same after merging FLUME-2957 so unfortunately most of
> > what I noted in my reply in the other thread (
> > https://s.apache.org/GqcX ) still holds.
> >
> > I hope that we can upgrade the Solr dependencies as part of the same
> > commit as the ES dependencies to avoid worrying about which lucene jar
> > is first in the classpath, and ensure we are not adding any additional
> > dependency conflicts to mvn dependency:tree.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mike
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 12:54 AM, Wahrmann, Helmut <
> > helmut.wahrm...@rsa.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > now that the blocker for FLUME-3021 is removed by committing
> > > FLUME-2957, can we get the patch from 3021 merged to trunk?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Helmut
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to