I have no idea on storm-kafka-client, but some bugfix issues for storm-kafka-client are waiting for reviewing / merging.
STORM-2014 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2014> STORM-2087 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2087> STORM-2104 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2104> If someone can review them in several days it would be great. I hope that we include currently opened pull requests for Storm SQL so that we can release 'usable Storm SQL' more usable, but I'm also OK to postpone them to be included to next release if they drag the release. STORM-1446 <http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1446> STORM-1443 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1443> STORM-2148 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2148> STORM-2170 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2170> I can see some pull requests which address Trident implementations for storm-kafka-client, storm-mongodb, storm-cassandra. storm-kafka-client: STORM-1694 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1694> (patch for 2.0 is merged, patch for 1.x is ready for reviewing) storm-cassandra: STORM-1369 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1369> storm-mongodb: STORM-1607 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1607> If we want to cut the release now, we could include only bugfix issues and postpone others. Otherwise we could discuss and include some or all of the above. What do you think? When we want to start the release process for 1.1.0? - Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) 2016년 11월 16일 (수) 오전 4:11, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]>님이 작성: Thanks Xin, I added it to the 1.1.0 epic. -Taylor > On Nov 15, 2016, at 9:01 AM, Xin Wang <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]>: > >> 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 <[email protected]>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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]>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 <[email protected]> >> 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 < >>>>> [email protected]> 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) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>
