all - as you can see the RC vote thread is out. I'll send the customary vote thread helper e-mail in a sec.
Oleg - i am pretty sure i captured your two kafka patches properly but if you can verify they look good on the ticket that would be great. Thanks Joe On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 8:09 AM, Oleg Zhurakousky <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree, I think we discussed it before and the Kafka upgrade doesn't belong > in 41 > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Dec 18, 2015, at 23:26, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> with the Kafka client change backed out for 0.5.0, I'm good to go with >> 0.4.1 on the rest of the changes. >> >>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:11 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Sean, >>> >>> Yeah i don't disagree with that point. The caveat being it was only a >>> change to that client not a change to support the new client API and >>> the behavior with existing clients old and new verified. >>> >>> I'd prefer to stick with 0.4.1 and if you still think it is best to >>> actually just revert that commit and apply it toward 0.5.0. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Thanks >>> Joe >>> >>>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Can we update to 0.5.0 instead? The kafka client change isn't >>>> something I'd expect in a patch release. >>>> >>>>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 9:54 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> ok - so master is presently on 041 and it does indeed appear to be all >>>>> incremental friendly fixes. So looks like we can just use the normal >>>>> process. As excited as I was to use cherry-pick doesn't look like it >>>>> is needed. >>>>> >>>>> The bugs fixed on 041 so far are all nice cleanup items and things >>>>> which have been problematic for quite a while. However, there are a >>>>> few site-to-site issues that would create some pretty annoying issues >>>>> for users so best to eliminate them. And big thanks to Matt Clarke >>>>> for finding and reporting them! >>>>> >>>>> Gonna prep an RC. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> Joe >>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Tony Kurc <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> I have no objection to "because we should be able to do this well!" as a >>>>>> reason. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Oleg Zhurakousky < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Generally RCs are used to address that level of validation, so in the >>>>>>> end >>>>>>> I still think it's a more of a culture one chooses. One common example; >>>>>>> x.x.1+ = maintenance, x.1+.0 = minor features + bugs and 1+.0.0 = major >>>>>>> features. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In any event IMHO the ability to quickly release maintenance releases is >>>>>>> very important as it showcases our attention to quality >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Dec 17, 2015, at 19:32, Tony Kurc <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm not sure I understand "more validation" reasoning - won't features >>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>> the end have very little validation? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Another reason to release 0.4.1 is to allow the additions that warrant >>>>>>>>> 0.5.0 to have more validation before release. With a regular release >>>>>>> cycle, >>>>>>>>> features can go in at the beginning to have more time for catching >>>>>>>>> bugs >>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>> them. I also agree with what Sean said below. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> rb >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 12/17/2015 04:00 PM, Sean Busbey wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 5:50 PM, Tony Kurc <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> s/features/buxfixes/ >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 6:50 PM, Tony Kurc <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Is there a reason to not just cut a 0.5.0 instead of grafting 0.5.0 >>>>>>>>>>>> features onto 0.4.1? >>>>>>>>>> This is a good question. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Some downstream users might have different change processes for a >>>>>>> patch vs >>>>>>>>>> minor release, so making a 0.4.1 that fixes what we determine to be a >>>>>>>>>> substantial gap in the 0.4 line would be nice for them. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> While we might be a young project now, it would be good to already >>>>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> habit practiced for when we have more users in enterprise settings. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On the other hand, 0.4.0 just happened, so a release in 3 days would >>>>>>>>>> minimize the number of "stuck on 0.4.0" folks. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Ryan Blue >>>>>>>>> Software Engineer >>>>>>>>> Cloudera, Inc. >> >> >> >> -- >> Sean >>
