On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 8:14 PM Bharath Vissapragada <[email protected]> wrote:
> 'I merged the branch in master. I'll keep an eye on the nightly builds > incase some issues pop up. If you see any weird issues in tests, especially > around buggy 'Connection's, let me know. Thanks. > > Hurray! S > On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 1:56 PM Bharath Vissapragada <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I got a +1 from Sean. I'll merge the branch EOD tomorrow (Feb 19, > Pacific) > > unless anyone objects. > > > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 10:57 AM Bharath Vissapragada < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Sure Sean. I'll wait for your +1 before merging. I see that you've > >> already gone through the doc PR, let me address your comments. > >> > >> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 6:25 AM Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> Please do not merge until I have a chance to look through it. I can > start > >>> that today. > >>> > >>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 19:11 Bharath Vissapragada <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> > 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 < > >>> [email protected]> > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > >>> > > @Sean Ack, let me prepare a PR for the doc. > >>> > > > >>> > > @Duo Zhang <[email protected]>: 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) < > [email protected]> > >>> > > 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 <[email protected]> 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 < > >>> [email protected]> > >>> > >> > 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. > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >> >
