Sounds reasonable to me. On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Rams Venkatesh <[email protected]> wrote:
> We can mark as obsolete till the current HA is released and then remove it > completely. > > -Rams > > > On 1 Jun 2017, at 6:34 pm, Alexander Kolbasov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > What is the intention here? Do we expect someone to play with old HA? In > > this case we should mark it obsolete. Or is it something that never > worked > > and was never supported? Then leaving it will just confuse people. > > > > - Alex > > > >> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Na Li <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> I prefere to mark it obsolete, so we retain the history. > >> > >> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 9:48 AM, Sergio Pena <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> The new SentryHA design replaced the old design completely + the old > >> design > >>> was never released, wasn't it?. Isn't removing the configuration the > best > >>> option? > >>> > >>> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 5:13 AM, Rams Venkatesh <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Obsolete is more appropriate than completely removing it. > >>>> > >>>> -Rams > >>>> > >>>>> On 1 Jun 2017, at 10:07 am, Alexander Kolbasov <[email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> We have an old page on wiki for configuring Sentry ha - > >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SENTRY/ > >>>> Sentry+HA+Server+Client+Configuration > >>>>> . > >>>>> > >>>>> I'd like to either remove it or mark it as obsolete. > >>>>> > >>>>> Any objections? > >>>> > >>> > >> >
