Yes. ;) > On Jan 23, 2018, at 11:21 AM, Srikanth Viswanathan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Taylor, > > Do you mean 1.0.6 instead of 1.0.5? Thanks. > > On Jan 23, 2018 10:59, "P. Taylor Goetz" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I just cut a release candidate for 1.2.0 and am working on RCs for 1.1.2 >> and 1.0.5. >> >> I’m running into some build issues on 1.1.x that are causing delays, but >> wanted to let others know the releases are underway. >> >> -Taylor >> >>> On Jan 14, 2018, at 10:03 AM, Alexandre Vermeerbergen < >> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I can also add that storm kafka client 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT also works >>> pretty well with Storm 1.1.0 : we patched in production our "logs >>> centralization to HBase" topology to use the Spout from storm kafka >>> client 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT and we have super-stable behavior with ~25000 >>> line of logs per second processed with relatively small setup (4 >>> spouts, and a 4-data nodes Hadoop cluster). >>> >>> I must also confess that, so far, this setup is likely the one we're >>> going to use for up *very soon" next production upgrade, because to >>> our experience, we have very strange behavior of Nimbus UI showing >>> wacky capacity statistics. For example, in our logs topology, our main >>> bolt shows a capacity of 492.583 with a Storm cluster fully based on >>> 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT, while the same topology fed by the same data on a >>> Storm cluster 1.1.0 (but based on Storm kafka client 1.2.0 SNAPSHOT) >>> gets a 0.142 capacity. >>> >>> So far, we don't know if the capacity computed by Storm 1.1.0 is >>> completely erroneous and underrated, or if there's a 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT >>> regression on capacity computation. I have been running out of time to >>> build a sample, so I'm for the moment cowardly considering keeping our >>> cluster at 1.1.0 version with storm kafka client 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT. >>> >>> Disclaimer : I haven't rebuilt Storm 1.2.0 SNAPSHOT full distrib using >>> maven for a long (1,5 month) while, so maybe this weird behavior of >>> "capacity" was fixed in the meantime... hope I'll be able to find time >>> to at least rebuild (upgrading our preproduction test is easy then) or >>> maybe some RC binaries will be available soon? >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Alexandre Vermeerbergen >>> >>> 2018-01-14 15:18 GMT+01:00 Stig Rohde Døssing <[email protected]>: >>>> I think we're planning to release 1.2.0 once >>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2203 has been merged. >>>> >>>> Yes, storm-kafka-client 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT will work with Storm 1.1.1. >>>> >>>> 2018-01-14 15:08 GMT+01:00 chandan singh <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> Stig, >>>>> >>>>> I saw lots of changes in storm-kafka-client 1.x when compared to 1.1.1. >>>>> Should I assume that storm-kafka-client from 1.x will work fine with >> storm >>>>> release 1.1.1? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> Chandan >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 7:29 PM, chandan singh <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Thanks Stig. >>>>>> >>>>>> I have considered that option but it is more easy to convince others >> to >>>>>> upgrade to a new release. I did read another mail thread discussing >> 1.2.0 >>>>>> release but felt 1.1.2 is more close to release than the former. >> Release >>>>> of >>>>>> 1.2.0 seemed pending in need of more consensus. Do we have an estimate >>>>> when >>>>>> is it coming out? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 2:07 PM, Stig Rohde Døssing < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Chandan, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't believe STORM-2549 is fixed in 1.1.2. We're hoping to release >>>>>>> 1.2.0 >>>>>>> soon, but if you need it now it's really easy to check out the Storm >>>>> code >>>>>>> and build storm-kafka-client yourself. Check out the 1.x-branch and >> do >>>>>>> "mvn >>>>>>> clean install -DskipTests" from the project root. The >> storm-kafka-client >>>>>>> jar will be in external/storm-kafka-client/target. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2018-01-14 9:01 GMT+01:00 chandan singh <[email protected]>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 Any idea when is 1.1.2v coming out. Under tremendous pressure to >>>>>>> upgrade >>>>>>>> storm-kafka-client due to STORM-2549 >>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2549>. Is there any >> help >>>>>>>> needed towards that goal? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 5:59 PM, Satish Duggana < >>>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> +1 to start release process for 1.1.2v >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 2:15 AM, Stig Rohde Døssing < >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> +1 for starting 1.1.2 release process. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 2018-01-08 20:27 GMT+01:00 P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]>: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If there are no remaining issues to be included, we can start >>>>> the >>>>>>>>> release >>>>>>>>>>> process. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -Taylor >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 7, 2018, at 7:07 PM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Bump, does someone have issues which are necessary to be >>>>>>> included >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>> Storm >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.1.2? If not I think we should start release phase for 1.1.2 >>>>>>> soon. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2017년 12월 28일 (목) 오후 3:16, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]>님이 >>>>>>> 작성: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I have been really busy so couldn't care about releases, and >>>>>>> now I >>>>>>>>> got >>>>>>>>>>>>> some time period to track again. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> We have been delaying new release, since we have been >>>>> focusing >>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>>> 1.2.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>> and issues relevant in storm-kafka-client have been raised >>>>>>>>>> continuously. >>>>>>>>>>>>> (though things looks like going to be less critical) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> But other than storm-kafka-client issues, I think Storm 1.1.2 >>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>> ready >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>> be released, and we should release Storm 1.1.2 regardless of >>>>>>> Storm >>>>>>>>>> 1.2.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>> because we have fixed another critical issues in core >>>>>>>>> (STORM-2231[1], >>>>>>>>>>>>> STORM-2682[2]) which are published to 1.0.5 but no release in >>>>>>>> 1.1.x >>>>>>>>>>> version >>>>>>>>>>>>> line yet. >>>>>>>>>>>>> (Noting that some bugfixes on storm-kafka-client are not >>>>> ported >>>>>>>> back >>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.1.x version line because of heavy divergence.) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It may not be good time to discuss since it is year-end now, >>>>>>> but >>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>>>>>> like to remind this so that we could start the process at >>>>> least >>>>>>>>>> earlier >>>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>> next year. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2231 >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2682 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017년 10월 19일 (목) 오전 1:19, Stig Rohde Døssing < >>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>> 님이 >>>>>>>>>>>>> 작성: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looks like Hugo is working on it >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2781 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-10-18 4:22 GMT+02:00 Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]>: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm hoping the delay for 1.2.0 will be very short. The >>>>>>> changes >>>>>>>> we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were minor, and had to do with renaming some of the new >>>>>>> methods >>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constants. It would be good to do before 1.2.0 because the >>>>>>>>> renames >>>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> breaking changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suppose the changes will be minor, then why not go ahead >>>>>>> making >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> change? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess it doesn't need much efforts to do. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Will Hugo submit the patch?) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm +1 to get it before 1.2.0, and also hope that the delay >>>>>>> will >>>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>>>>> very >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> short. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017년 10월 14일 (토) 오후 6:05, Alexandre Vermeerbergen < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>님이 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 작성: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 for a short delay until 1.2.0 is avaible :) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-10-14 8:48 GMT+02:00 Stig Rohde Døssing < >>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm hoping the delay for 1.2.0 will be very short. The >>>>>>> changes >>>>>>>>> we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were minor, and had to do with renaming some of the new >>>>>>>> methods >>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constants. It would be good to do before 1.2.0 because >>>>> the >>>>>>>>> renames >>>>>>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> breaking changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-10-14 5:33 GMT+02:00 Arun Mahadevan < >>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was hoping we will get 1.2.0 out along with 1.1.2. The >>>>>>>>> pending >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the epic https://issues.apache.org/ >>>>> jira/browse/STORM-2710 >>>>>>>>> seems >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been addressed. Can you add the new issue to the epic? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If its not something critical we can do it in a minor >>>>>>> release >>>>>>>>>> post >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.0. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Arun >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/17, 3:50 AM, "Hugo Da Cruz Louro" < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am +1 to releasing 1.1.2 right away. I am in the >>>>>>> middle of >>>>>>>>> one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but I will finish it in the next day, such that we can >>>>> get >>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> merged >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, we need to hold onto releasing 1.2.0 until >>>>> some >>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for ProcessingGuarantee that got in this patch< >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> apache/storm/commit/48f6969027e7b02a5b9220577189d3 >>>>>>>> 911aa2226d> >>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I briefly discussed [1] this issue with @Stig on >>>>> Gitter, I >>>>>>>> will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> submit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patch with the change. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] - We did not have a technical discussion. I just >>>>>>> asked a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> couple >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clarifying questions and then the idea surged that we >>>>>>> should >>>>>>>>>>>>>> improve >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the changes in this patch<https://github.com/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> apache/storm/commit/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 48f6969027e7b02a5b9220577189d3911aa2226d>. I will >>>>> create >>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>> JIRA, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the discussion go through either JIRA or dev email list. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 10, 2017, at 12:48 PM, Stig Rohde Døssing < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]< >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Jungtaek, that sounds like a good plan. Here's >>>>> the >>>>>>>> new >>>>>>>>> PR >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2607 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2367. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Beginning release next week sounds good to me. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-10-10 17:42 GMT+02:00 Arun Mahadevan < >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> arunm >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @apache.org>>: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 for addressing the pending reviews and getting 1.2.0 >>>>>>> out >>>>>>>>>> soon. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/10/17, 6:14 AM, "Jungtaek Lim" < >>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>> <mailto: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> kabh >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stig, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's just handle all the issues pending Storm 1.1.2. >>>>> For >>>>>>>>>> pending >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Storm 1.2.0, I already handled all the things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For STORM-2607, could you just take over and craft a >>>>> new >>>>>>>> pull >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> request? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are waiting more than 2 months after requesting simple >>>>>>>> rebase >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (sadly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not done yet), which I don't think it's acceptable. >>>>> That >>>>>>>> issue >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relates a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bug which we should handle it in time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (The patch includes your work indeed.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For STORM-2549, let's see someone could review in this >>>>>>> week. >>>>>>>>>> I'll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> try >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get it too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then I think we can start release phase for Storm 1.1.2 >>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.0 at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week. Opinions anyone? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017년 10월 10일 (화) 오전 4:02, Stig Rohde Døssing < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mailto:[email protected]>>님이 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 작성: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe we would be better off releasing 1.1.2 as is, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> postponing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other issues to 1.2.0? I don't think we should delay >>>>> the >>>>>>> fix >>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2682 for >>>>>>> much >>>>>>>>>>>>>> longer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-09-22 14:50 GMT+02:00 Alexandre Vermeerbergen < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]<mailto:avermeerbergen@gmail. >>>>> com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know if that help, but we're still waiting with >>>>>>> lots >>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expectations https://issues.apache.org/ >>>>>>>> jira/browse/STORM-2648 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Storm >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.0 ! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexandre Vermeerbergen >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-09-22 12:24 GMT+02:00 Jungtaek Lim < >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kabh >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>>: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looks like three weeks went by from initiating the >>>>>>> thread. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm seeing some issues pending for review and all of >>>>> them >>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regarding >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> storm-kafka-client. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remaining issues are below: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Storm 1.1.2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2549 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2607 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2666 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Storm 1.2.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2648 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please note that above issues are 'effectively' blocker >>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I said Storm 1.1.1 has critical issue which is fixed >>>>> and >>>>>>>> will >>>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> available >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at Storm 1.1.2, so at least I'd like to see the >>>>> progress >>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>>> Storm >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.1.2, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and ideally with Storm 1.2.0 since there's only one >>>>> issue >>>>>>>> left >>>>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> epic. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please finish reviewing if you are in reviewing one or >>>>>>> more >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> try to start reviewing them but take some times since >>>>> I'm >>>>>>>> not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> familiar >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that module. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017년 8월 30일 (수) 오전 2:45, P. Taylor Goetz < >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ptgo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>>님이 작성: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It looks to me like 1.0.5 is ready for a release >>>>>>> candidate >>>>>>>>>> (still >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ongoing work for 1.1.2, but likely soon). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything else we would want to include in >>>>> 1.0.5 >>>>>>> or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> go >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ahead with a release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Taylor >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 25, 2017, at 3:26 AM, Jungtaek Lim < >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kabh >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi devs, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We received a bug report (STORM-2682 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2682>) on >>>>>>>> Storm >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0.4 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.1.1 which prevents Storm cluster from update. >>>>>>> Personally >>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> looks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty critical, and hopefully it is fixed now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So maybe we would like to have another bug fix releases >>>>>>>>> quickly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affected 1.x version lines. What do you think? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also please enumerate the issues if you would want to >>>>>>>> include >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues to the new bug fix releases, so that we can >>>>> create >>>>>>>> epic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> track them to make releases happening sooner. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> >>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
