Ilya,
Sorry for getting back to you so late.
No idea, why it was necessary to make them configurable during the build
process.I would go with this solution, since the whole process depends on the
the links and will not likely be changed in near future.- Update the links in
the file once and remove them from build process.
What do you think?
P.S. I moved the topic away from Ignite 2.7 release.
--
Roman
On Friday, September 14, 2018, 7:22:27 p.m. GMT+9, Ilya Kasnacheev
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hello!
So now there's an issue that this script makes source change after every build,
show up in git status.
What we could do to it:- Commit the changes after the build, once. In hopes
that it won't change very often. With benefit that we could do that right now,
before the code freeze.
- Move these values to a properties file from both pom.xml and
IgniteProvider.java. Any problems with this approach? We'll just read them from
classpath properties file.
- Update the links in the file once and remove them from build process. Why
were they added to build process in the first place - to make them configurable
during build?
Regards,
--
Ilya Kasnacheev
вт, 11 сент. 2018 г. в 5:53, Roman Shtykh <[email protected]>:
Ilya,
The "latest" version is the default, and resolved by
https://ignite.apache.org/latest which is used by our web site when a user
download the latest Ignite version. And I think this is the authority to judge
of the latest official release (pom.xml you suggest can have SNAPSHOTs
etc.).Also, as I explained during our review sessions, ignite-mesos-2.6.0 is a
driver and doesn't mean you need to have Ignite 2.6.0. User can run any version
of Ignite he/she specifies. By default, it's "latest" but a user can specify
any version needed, even from a non-archive URL.
In short, what we have now1. mesos driver (ignite-mesos-x.x.x) will use
"latest" version by default -> it will try to resolve the latest officially
releases version of Apache Ignite, find the closest mirror and download Ignite
in a minute. If the version resolution fails, we fall back to the slow apache
archive (as you suggest; in my opinion we better fail-fast instead of waiting
for hours to download, so the user can choose another download option (3))2. If
the user specifies the version explicitly, it goes to the slow apache archive.
3. The user can put ignite zip file on his/her http server and provide the URL
as a parameter to the driver, if options 1 and 2 don't work.
As you see, there are 3 options. And I just fix the 1st one with
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9388 and don't change the original
logic (which I find reasonable) documented on our site -- I don't see how it
blocks anything.
Roman Shtykh
On Monday, September 10, 2018, 6:16:15 p.m. GMT+9, Ilya Kasnacheev
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hello!
There's still two issues with the submission.
The first one is that we're downloading "latest" version from preferred mirror
but a specified version, such as "2.6", we're also going to download from
"slow" archive.apache.org/dist.That's a great limitation for this change, since
most real deployments of Apache Ignite will have their Ignite version pegged to
a specific release. But in this case there's no win in download speed.In my
opinion it is a blocker.
The second one is that we can't download anything when we failed to resolve
"latest". My idea is that we should try and download last known version in this
case, which can be pushed to source from pom.xml, as we already do with URLs.
So if you could not resolve "latest" you will download 2.7.0.
Buuut, maybe it's not necessary, maybe we should just discourage "latest",
which is in my opinion almost always a bad idea.
WDYT?
Regards,
--
Ilya Kasnacheev
вс, 9 сент. 2018 г. в 5:47, Roman Shtykh <[email protected]>:
Hi Ilya,
Sorry, missed that.
Added now.
--
Roman Shtykh
On Thursday, September 6, 2018, 6:16:58 p.m. GMT+9, Ilya Kasnacheev
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hello!
The last of my requests still standing is that we should fall-back to single
URL download in case of error with 'latest' version. Everything else looks good
to me.
Can we do that? I'm really worried that Apache API will go sour.
Regards,
--
Ilya Kasnacheev
чт, 6 сент. 2018 г. в 8:56, Roman Shtykh <[email protected]>:
Hi Ilya,
Thanks again.
1) Done.2) Used catch() for latest version.
Please see my comments on github.
--
Roman Shtykh
On Wednesday, September 5, 2018, 11:30:10 p.m. GMT+9, Ilya Kasnacheev
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hello!
I've left a new wave of replies.
Basically, 1) let's keep DOWNLOAD_URL_PATTERN string value inlined so that it
will work even if build process is broken (would be useful for e.g. developing
out of IDE)
And also I urge you to catch() around new fragile Apache JSON API resolving,
and download the 'current' version instead, as defined by ignite-mesos version.
This is because this module is not under continuouos scrutiny so extra care
should be applied.--
Ilya Kasnacheev
вт, 4 сент. 2018 г. в 13:42, Roman Shtykh <[email protected]>:
Thanks, Ilya!I will check your comments, and discuss it at JIRA.
--
Roman Shtykh
On Tuesday, September 4, 2018, 7:17:53 p.m. GMT+9, Ilya Kasnacheev
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hello!
IGNITE-9408 looks good to me and may be merged right away.
IGNITE-9388 needs more work in my opinion, I have commented the PR. I also
advice having test for this functionality.
Regards,
--
Ilya Kasnacheev
вт, 4 сент. 2018 г. в 6:52, Roman Shtykh <[email protected]>:
Igniters,
I would like Mesos integration update be included in the upcoming release.Can
anyone review prs for the following issues?
IGNITE-9388: mesos IgniteProvider tries to access obsolete ignite.run or
download from slow archiveIGNITE-9408: Update mesos version
Roman Shtykh
On Thursday, August 30, 2018, 9:25:43 p.m. GMT+9, Vyacheslav Daradur
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Igniters!
I'm working on the following Service Grid tasks:
- IGNITE-8361 Use discovery messages for service deployment
- IGNITE-8362 Collect service deployment results asynchronously on coordinator
- IGNITE-8363 Handle topology changes during service deployment
- IGNITE-8364 Propagate deployed services to joining nodes
- IGNITE-8365 Introduce service failure events
- IGNITE-3392 Propagate service deployment results from assigned nodes
to initiator
Let's call them *phase 1* because the should be implemented together
(atomically).
I do my best to finish phase 1 for including to 2.7 release.
But I'm not sure that the solution will be fully completed till the
beginning of October.
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 7:18 PM Nikolay Izhikov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hell, Yakov
>
> I'm ok with your proposal.
>
> * Scope freeze - September 17 - We should have a full list of tickets
>for 2.7 here.
> * Code freeze - October 01 - We should merge all 2.7 tickets to master
>here.
> * Vote on RC1 - October 11.
> * Vote on release - October 15.
>
> В Ср, 29/08/2018 в 12:39 +0300, Yakov Zhdanov пишет:
> > Nikolay,
> >
> > I think we should have 2 weeks after code freeze which by the way may
> > include RC1 voting stage. This way I would like us to agree that release
> > candidate should be sent to vote on Oct, 11th and we can release on Oct,
> > 15th.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > --Yakov
--
Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
