Some issues on Storm SQL are resolved but not documented yet. I'll file an issue and assign to 1.1.0 release epic. And also I want to address dropping aggregation and join on Storm SQL Trident mode before releasing. I'll assign it too.
- Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) 2016년 11월 15일 (화) 오전 5:55, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com>님이 작성: > I think we’re very close. I would like to confirm that the 1.x-branch is > not affected by STORM-2176. > > The worker lifecycle API was added in 1.0, but doesn’t work in any > released version due to STORM-2176. > > If there are any other open JIRAs that anyone is passionate about, now > would be a good time to assign them to the 1.1.0 release epic (STORM-1856). > > -Taylor > > > > > On Oct 27, 2016, at 12:19 PM, Jungtaek Lim <kabh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Finally Pacemaker H/A, Supervisor V2, and Storm SQL PRs which were opened > > at the last mail (4 weeks ago) are all merged to 1.x branch. > > > > There're some more PRs on Storm SQL opened, but given that we can release > > new minor at any time when we feel it's enough change, I can wait for it. > > They didn't get reviewed yet indeed. > > > > Is there something else we would want to include it to 1.1.0? > > > > Thanks, > > Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > > > > 2016년 10월 1일 (토) 오전 9:30, Jungtaek Lim <kabh...@gmail.com>님이 작성: > > > >> Personally, merging and porting back to three branches are painful > enough, > >> especially we don't have merging script and having verbose process (I > mean > >> CHANGELOG). > >> It would be better if merging process is automated (by running script or > >> so), so I'd +1 to revisit Harsha's suggestion (adopting Kafka merge > script) > >> and modify script to fit to Storm. > >> (It will not work if it's the case we need to handle PRs for each > version > >> line, since 'Close' in commit log doesn't close the PR if its target > branch > >> is not master.) > >> > >> Anyway, without automation I don't want to maintain more version lines. > >> I'm looking at the announces from other projects, and others are only > >> maintaining two version lines. > >> Since we maintain 2.0.0 version line we can't reduce version lines to 2, > >> but hopefully at most 3. > >> > >> Btw, let's check pending pull requests and enumerate which can be > included > >> in 1.0.0, and start/finish review and merge them soon. > >> For me Supervisor V2 and Pacemaker H/A, and pending Storm SQL PRs can be > >> included, since they are small or in reviewing and expected to pass > review > >> phase soon. > >> (And some small PRs. There're other valuable PRs in PR list but I'm not > >> sure we can review them soon. One example is unified API.) > >> > >> One issue which is not clear is STORM-2006 > >> <https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1595>. This is a candidate for > me, > >> but gets blocked while reviewing. If we plan to put great effort to > revise > >> Metric we can skip this. > >> > >> Please enumerate other PRs as well if you want to include in 1.1.0. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Jungtaek Lim > >> > >> 2016년 9월 30일 (금) 오후 11:09, Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid>님이 > 작성: > >> > >> Sounds good to me. It would be nice to get some of the new features > out. > >> Do we expect to maintain both 1.0.x and 1.1.x lines with bug fixes? > And if > >> so for how long do we want to do this for? - Bobby > >> > >> On Thursday, September 29, 2016 7:35 PM, Jungtaek Lim < > >> kabh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> Hi devs, > >> > >> It's been 5 months after releasing Storm 1.0.0, and now 1.x branch has > lots > >> of CHANGELOG and also pending reviews. > >> It's also been a long time after 1.1.0 RC1 is canceled. > >> > >> I think it may be good to put some efforts to review and merge pending > pull > >> requests (except things which takes time to review and test), and > release > >> 1.1.0 soon. > >> > >> What do you think? > >> > >> I'm also open to volunteer release manager for 1.1.0 after we document > the > >> process of official release. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >
