Heya, Now that we have this repo, we need to establish some basic release processes around it. I propose: - We need a new version numbering scheme for releases from this repository. For hbase-third-party, we have simply "thirdparty-". For all the other repos, we use the entire repository name as the release version prefix. I propose that we adopt the prefix "hbase-kustomize-" for this repository's releases. - We need a release scheme for this repository. We also need to define what a release means in terms of compatibility guidelines. This is an orchestration definition -- essentially, a data structure that represents the serialized state of a Kubernetes cluster's API -- so its definitions of compatibility will likely deviate a bit from our existing definitions. Until we've sorted this out (a dedicated DISCUSS thread, once someone can make a proposal), I propose we use a simple incrementing 0.x versioning scheme for any release tags we produce.
Based on these first two points, I propose that we start with an initial JIRA fixVersion of "hbase-kustomize-0.1". (As a separate topic, we may also want to unify this version number prefix across our repositories, by using "hbase-thirdparty-" as that repo's version prefix going forward.) What do you think? Thanks, Nick On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 7:18 PM Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> wrote: > I’ve created this repository. > > Unless there is an objection, I’ll push an initial commit with a LICENSE > file so that there’s a baseline to make PRs against. > > Thanks, > Nick > > On Fri, 9 Jun 2023 at 18:30, Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks everyone who has replied. >> >> If there are no further concerns raised over the weekend, I’ll get >> started on Monday with Infrastructure to provision the new repository. >> >> Thanks, >> Nick >> >> On Fri, 9 Jun 2023 at 18:08, Peter Somogyi <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> +1 on the new repository. >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 5:33 PM Viraj Jasani <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > +1 for hbase-kustomize >>> > >>> > On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 4:44 AM Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > > Hello, >>> > > >>> > > As I work through the integration of these kustomize definitions >>> into the >>> > > existing java project structure that is hbase-operator-tools, I'm >>> > > increasingly of the opinion that this is too much of a clash of >>> > concerns. I >>> > > think that this contribution would make better sense as its own >>> > repository >>> > > with its own release cycle. I'm neither aware of nor can I imagine a >>> > > technical coupling between the kustomize resources and the rest of >>> the >>> > > utilities in operator-tools. Likewise, this change set introduces new >>> > > requirements (docker, buildx, KinD and/or minikube) to the build and >>> test >>> > > environment that are not otherwise needed by operator-tools. >>> > > >>> > > What do you think? SHould we request a new repository for the >>> > > kustomize files? I propose hbase-kustomize.git. >>> > > >>> > > Thanks, >>> > > Nick >>> > > >>> > > On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 4:33 PM Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> > > >>> > > > I went ahead and rebuilt the Hadoop image module in the same >>> style. I >>> > > > rebased the zookeeper-single and hdfs kustimize implementations >>> onto >>> > the >>> > > > same structure. So, PR’s #118, #119, #120, and #121 are all in this >>> > > style. >>> > > > I don’t have a place for running integration tests, but unit tests >>> are >>> > > now >>> > > > running in Jenkins. >>> > > > >>> > > > I appreciate any attention you can provide. >>> > > > >>> > > > Thanks, >>> > > > Nick >>> > > > >>> > > > On Mon, 22 May 2023 at 16:02, TAK-LON WU <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > >> Sorry that I’m on vacation and will be back online after 06/06 , >>> but >>> > > >> thanks >>> > > >> for putting the PR out and I believe someone on our side will >>> review >>> > it >>> > > . >>> > > >> ( >>> > > >> or when I come back I will review them) >>> > > >> >>> > > >> -Stephen >>> > > >> >>> > > >> On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 6:08 PM Nick Dimiduk <[email protected] >>> > >>> > > wrote: >>> > > >> >>> > > >> > Heya team, >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > I have rebuilt one of the early PRs so that the docker image >>> build >>> > > >> pieces >>> > > >> > are integrated with the maven build. If this is acceptable to >>> the >>> > > >> > reviewers, I'll go forward with integrating the other images and >>> > > >> > kustomize/kuttl tests in the same way. >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > Please take a look. >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > Thanks, >>> > > >> > Nick >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > https://github.com/apache/hbase-operator-tools/pull/118 >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 4:19 PM Nick Dimiduk < >>> [email protected]> >>> > > >> wrote: >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > > Heya team, >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > I have created individual pull-requests for each of the major >>> > > >> functional >>> > > >> > > pieces outlined in the initial branch. These await review. >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > I've now started working integrating the test harness into the >>> > maven >>> > > >> > > build. After a brief detour for a Yetus plugin, I'm now >>> looking >>> > > >> instead >>> > > >> > at >>> > > >> > > maven integration via exec-maven-plugin. I'm also >>> investigating >>> > how >>> > > to >>> > > >> > pull >>> > > >> > > the container image build up into maven as well. >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > Thanks, >>> > > >> > > Nic, >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > On Thu, May 4, 2023 at 2:42 PM Nick Dimiduk < >>> [email protected]> >>> > > >> wrote: >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > >> Heya team, >>> > > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >> I've created a feature ticket [0] from which this >>> contribution >>> > can >>> > > >> hang. >>> > > >> > >> I've created an associated release version [1] and feature >>> branch >>> > > [2] >>> > > >> > >> against which we can target PRs while things take shape. I've >>> > > >> published >>> > > >> > my >>> > > >> > >> initial extraction of this feature as a whole for your >>> review [3] >>> > > -- >>> > > >> > take a >>> > > >> > >> look at the big picture there. For each commit on that >>> branch, >>> > I've >>> > > >> > created >>> > > >> > >> a sub-task on HBASE-27827. Probably reviewers will find other >>> > items >>> > > >> we >>> > > >> > need >>> > > >> > >> to peel off as sub-tasks. I'll start turning each of these >>> > commits >>> > > >> into >>> > > >> > PRs >>> > > >> > >> suitable for the Apache repo and your perusal. >>> > > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >> I think we're getting due for the 1.3 release of Operator >>> Tools, >>> > > so I >>> > > >> > >> expect this will land in 1.4. >>> > > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >> Thanks, >>> > > >> > >> Nick >>> > > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >> [0]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27827 >>> > > >> > >> [1]: >>> > > >> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE/fixforversion/12353199 >>> > > >> > >> [2]: >>> > > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> >>> > > >>> > >>> https://github.com/apache/hbase-operator-tools/tree/HBASE-27827-kubernetes-deployment >>> > > >> > >> [3]: >>> > > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> >>> > > >>> > >>> https://github.com/apache/hbase-operator-tools/compare/HBASE-27827-kubernetes-deployment...ndimiduk:hbase-operator-tools:HBASE-27827-kubernetes-deployment >>> > > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >> On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 11:28 AM Nick Dimiduk < >>> > [email protected] >>> > > > >>> > > >> > >> wrote: >>> > > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >>> Heya team, >>> > > >> > >>> >>> > > >> > >>> Over here at $dayjob, we have an increasing reliance on >>> > Kubernetes >>> > > >> for >>> > > >> > >>> both development and production workloads. Our tools are >>> > maturing >>> > > >> and >>> > > >> > >>> we're hoping that they might be of interest to the wider >>> > > community. >>> > > >> > >>> I'd like to see if there's community interest in receiving >>> > > some/any >>> > > >> of >>> > > >> > >>> them as a contribution. I think we'll also need a plan from >>> ASF >>> > > >> Infra >>> > > >> > >>> that makes kubernetes available to us as a project. >>> > > >> > >>> >>> > > >> > >>> We have implemented a basic stack of tools for >>> orchestrating ZK >>> > + >>> > > >> HDFS >>> > > >> > >>> + HBase on Kubernetes. We use this for running a small >>> local dev >>> > > >> > >>> cluster via MiniKube/KIND ; for ITBLL on smallish >>> distributed >>> > > >> clusters >>> > > >> > >>> in a public cloud ; and in production for running clusters >>> of >>> > ~100 >>> > > >> > >>> Data Nodes/Region Servers in a public cloud. There was an >>> > earlier >>> > > >> > >>> discussion about using our donation of test hardware for >>> running >>> > > >> more >>> > > >> > >>> thorough tests in our CI, but one of the limiting factors is >>> > full >>> > > >> > >>> cluster deployment. I hope that the community might be >>> > interested >>> > > in >>> > > >> > >>> receiving this tooling as a foundation for more rigorous >>> > > correctness >>> > > >> > >>> and maybe even performance tests in the open. Furthermore, >>> > perhaps >>> > > >> the >>> > > >> > >>> wider community has interest in an Apache licensed cluster >>> > > >> > >>> orchestration tool for other uses. >>> > > >> > >>> >>> > > >> > >>> Now for some details: The implementation is built on >>> Kustomize, >>> > so >>> > > >> > >>> it's fundamentally transparent resource specification with >>> yaml >>> > > >> > >>> patches for composability; this is in contrast to a solution >>> > using >>> > > >> > >>> templates with defined capabilities and interfaces. There >>> is no >>> > > >> > >>> operator ; it's all coordinated via init/bootstrap >>> containers, >>> > > shell >>> > > >> > >>> scripts, shared volumes for state, &c. For now. >>> > > >> > >>> >>> > > >> > >>> Such a donation will amount to a code drop, which will have >>> its >>> > > >> > >>> challenges. I'm motivated via internal processes to carve it >>> > into >>> > > >> > >>> smaller pieces, and I think that will benefit community >>> review >>> > as >>> > > >> > >>> well. Perhaps this approach could be used to make the >>> > contribution >>> > > >> via >>> > > >> > >>> a feature branch. >>> > > >> > >>> >>> > > >> > >>> Is there community interest in adding such a capability to >>> our >>> > > >> > >>> maintained responsibilities? I'd hope that we have several >>> > > >> volunteers >>> > > >> > >>> to work with me through the contribution process, and who >>> are >>> > > >> > >>> reasonably confident that they'll be able to help maintain >>> such >>> > a >>> > > >> > >>> capability going forward. We'll also need someone who can >>> work >>> > > with >>> > > >> > >>> Infra to get us access to Kubernetes cluster(s), via >>> whatever >>> > > means. >>> > > >> > >>> >>> > > >> > >>> What do you think? >>> > > >> > >>> >>> > > >> > >>> Thanks, >>> > > >> > >>> Nick & the HBase team at Apple >>> > > >> > >>> >>> > > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>> >>
