The PR <https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/1167> to merge the feature branch is up for review. I'll wait for it to run all the tests. If everything looks good, I'll merge it by 13 Feb EOD pacific time *unless* anyone has any objections. Please speak up here or on the pull request.
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:13 PM Bharath Vissapragada <bhara...@apache.org> wrote: > @Sean Ack, let me prepare a PR for the doc. > > @Duo Zhang <zhang...@apache.org>: No, the current plan is to ship the ZK > dependency as-is with the client so that the users can easily switch > between the registries without rebuilding the client. I think we can get > rid of the dependency (by depreciating first?) once we are 100% confident > that there are no known issues with the new registry implementation. This > might take some time. > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 7:12 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> So we will declare zookeeper as an optional dependency for hbase-client, >> and if users want to use the zk based registry, they should include the zk >> dependency explictly in their pom? >> >> Sean Busbey <bus...@apache.org> 于2020年2月7日周五 上午9:39写道： >> >> > Oh, the response is over in this other subthread. Apologies for the bump >> > elsethread. Comments below. >> > >> > On Wed, Feb 5, 2020, 01:37 Bharath Vissapragada <bhara...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Thanks everyone for chiming in. Sean, regarding your comments. >> > > >> > > > I don't see the current design doc in the feature branch >> > > (i.e.dev-support/design-docs) please include it there >> > > >> > > Of course, HBASE-23331 < >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-23331> >> > > is >> > > the subtask for this. The plan is to update the ref guide with all the >> > > details once the branch is merged in the master. I'll make sure to add >> > the >> > > design doc too. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Please land proposed doc changes before merge to master. The design doc >> > landing as a part of the merge is fine, but ref guide changes are >> something >> > that I'm going to want to look at when evaluating the feature for >> > suitability for landing. >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > > > the current design doc has comments open still, should I assume >> those >> > > things haven't been addressed in the branch? or should I assume they >> have >> > > but it hasn't been updated yet? >> > > >> > > I addressed most of them already, forgot to resolve the comments. >> There >> > > were some new comments since this email, so I addressed them and >> cleaned >> > up >> > > the doc. Thanks for pointing it out. >> > > >> > >> > Awesome. thanks! I'll take another look. >> > >> >
