STORM-2205: Race condition in getting nimbus summaries while ZK connections are reconnected.
This issue seems to occur in our environments and I would like this to be part of 1.1.0. Thanks, Satish. On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]> wrote: > 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) > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >> >
