I would be +1 for including it On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 8:01 AM Xin Wang <data.xinw...@gmail.com> wrote:
STORM-2198 ( PR: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1773 ) fixes a bug of storm-hdfs. Do we have a consideration to include this? Thanks, Xin Wang (vesense) 2016-11-15 10:03 GMT+08:00 Jungtaek Lim <kabh...@gmail.com>: > 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) > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >
