Those some of the one’s I’ve been tracking for 1.1.1. I’ll do another run 
through JIRA to see if there’s anything else pending that needs to be included. 
I would encourage others to do so as well.

-Taylor


> On Jul 18, 2017, at 2:27 PM, Hugo Da Cruz Louro <hlo...@hortonworks.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jungtaek,
> 
> Currently there are 2 critical bugs and no blocker bugs.
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2342    - I still need to 
> investigate it. It may or may not be a bug. It is a bit surprising that such 
> basic functionality is not working.
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2554    - it has a pull request 
> pending review since 06/14/2017
> 
> Thanks,
> Hugo
> 
> On Jul 18, 2017, at 6:26 AM, Stig Rohde Døssing 
> <stigdoess...@gmail.com<mailto:stigdoess...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> I think a month seems realistic, yes.
> 
> Thanks for clarifying when it is okay to skip the waiting period.
> 
> 2017-07-18 13:44 GMT+02:00 Jungtaek Lim 
> <kabh...@gmail.com<mailto:kabh...@gmail.com>>:
> 
> Thanks for following up Stig.
> 
> According to your explanation, only a few issues are left for bug fix. I
> feel they could be resolved around a month, and then we can track them as
> epic issue from now on, and release once they're resolved. Make sense?
> 
> Btw, if my understanding is right, you don't need to wait for 24hr to merge
> #2221 (against 1.x-branch) given that #2152 (against master) is merged with
> respecting bylaw rule, and difference of two PRs are small enough.
> Accepting changes should follow bylaws, but porting back accepted changes
> are up to the committer (normally merger). Committers even could apply hot
> fix during merge phase if the patch couldn't be applied to other branches
> as well, and we don't need another PRs for that.
> 
> Thanks,
> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)
> 
> 2017년 7월 18일 (화) 오후 8:22, Stig Rohde Døssing 
> <stigdoess...@gmail.com<mailto:stigdoess...@gmail.com>>님이
> 작성:
> 
> Hi Jungtaek,
> 
> I think we're not too far off for most of the issues I'm aware of.
> 
> I'd like to get some fixes around topic compaction (
> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2221 and
> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2217) in for 1.1.1. They should be
> mergeable once the 24 hour period has passed. I think it would also be
> good
> to get the maxUncommittedOffsets limit enforcement (
> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2156) looked at, since it shouldn't
> require API changes and is a bugfix. Following 2156 and related to the
> two
> other PRs, there's also https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2546
> which I think we should consider fixing. It's waiting for PR 2156 to be
> stabilized, but is hopefully an easy fix. See
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2343?
> focusedCommentId=16044785&page=com.atlassian.jira.
> plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16044785
> for the discussion.
> 
> For 1.2.0, I think we should get in the KafkaSpoutConfig API changes and
> deprecations (https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2215) and a 1.x
> version
> of the manual partition assignment bugfix (
> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2150).
> 
> 2017-07-17 11:25 GMT+02:00 Jungtaek Lim 
> <kabh...@gmail.com<mailto:kabh...@gmail.com>>:
> 
> Hi devs,
> 
> We released Storm 1.1.0 at the late March, and we didn't have short
> plan
> for next release.
> (We discussed Storm 2.0.0, and I think we're getting closer, a bit
> slowly
> but steady.)
> 
> While we still have some issues and pull requests for
> storm-kafka-client
> which I think should be included to 1.0.1, but maybe we can start
> planning
> 1.1.1, having epic issue for release as we did for prior releases, and
> also
> other versions as well (1.2.0 or 2.0.0).
> 
> Unless I'm missing something, looks like there're no critical bugs
> except
> storm-kafka-client for 1.1.1 candidate. So I think we could roll out
> 1.1.1
> fairly soon after sorting out current issue on storm-kafka-client. I'm
> not
> familiar with storm-kafka-client module hence I'd like to rely on Hugo
> or
> Stig or other committers/contributors to sort out, but may spend some
> time
> to be familiar and participate if its progress is going to be slow.
> 
> Looking forward to hear your opinions.
> 
> Thanks,
> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)
> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to