OK. No more opinion/vote in 5 days. I'll treat consensus was made, and go
ahead making change: overwrite storm-kafka-client 1.2.0 to two branches
1.1.x/1.0.x.

-Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)

2018년 2월 1일 (목) 오전 10:48, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]>님이 작성:

> This discussion got 4 +1 (binding) and no -1. Moreover two active
> maintainers for storm-kafka-client (Hugo and Stig) voted +1.
>
> Do we want to hold on for hearing more voices, or treating above opinions
> as consensus and reflect the change?
>
> Btw, I think we need to sort out the sequences between two topics:
> separating storm-kafka-client as independent release cycle, and this. I
> guess some of us agreed former topic doesn't related to current RC, but I
> think this topic can be (should be) reflected to current RC ongoing.
>
> -Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)
>
> 2018년 2월 1일 (목) 오전 4:08, Hugo Da Cruz Louro <[email protected]>님이 작성:
>
>> +1 to replace storm-kafka-client in 1.0.x branch.
>> Hugo
>>
>> > On Jan 31, 2018, at 11:03 AM, Stig Rohde Døssing <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > +1 to replace storm-kafka-client in 1.0.x branch. Breaking semantic
>> > versioning is really nasty, but I think it is the lesser evil in this
>> case.
>> >
>> > 2018-01-31 5:14 GMT+01:00 Harsha <[email protected]>:
>> >
>> >> +1 to replace storm-kafka-client in 1.0.x branch
>> >> -Harsha
>> >> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018, at 7:04 PM, Jungtaek Lim wrote:
>> >>> Bump up this thread so that we could reach consensus earlier. Given
>> that
>> >> we
>> >>> got concern related to this, I think it is ideal to release
>> 1.1.x/1.0.x
>> >>> with making decision and applying the change if we want.
>> >>>
>> >>> 2018년 1월 30일 (화) 오전 9:25, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]>님이 작성:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Erik's concern brought from 1.0.6 RC1, because they can't use Storm
>> >> 1.1.0
>> >>>> or higher (Storm 1.1.0 broke storm-mesos.). While he could take an
>> >>>> workaround to use storm-kafka-client 1.2.0 or 1.1.2 (if we decide to
>> >>>> replace) with Storm 1.0.6, it would be better if we don't allow
>> leaving
>> >>>> storm-kafka-client in 1.0.x in inconsistent state.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> IMHO, breaking backward compatibility is worse, but leaving broken
>> >> thing
>> >>>> is worst. Hence I'm +1 to replace all, with noticing that it may
>> bring
>> >>>> backward incompatibility in release announce.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> 2018년 1월 30일 (화) 오전 4:49, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]>님이 작성:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> As I mentioned else thread I’m open to this but would defer to
>> >> community
>> >>>>> consensus.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> If there’s concern about doing this for 1.0.x, one option would be
>> >> skip
>> >>>>> that version line and only apply it to 1.2.0 and 1.1.x.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> -Taylor
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Jan 29, 2018, at 12:12 AM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Hi devs,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> This is initial post to separate out discussion topic from vote
>> >> thread,
>> >>>>> and
>> >>>>>> continue discussing.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Background of the topic:
>> >>>>>> 1. Only 1.x-branch of storm-kafka-client got stabilized.
>> >> (relatively)
>> >>>>>> 2. We would avoid to port back patches to 1.1.x and 1.0.x because
>> >>>>> they're
>> >>>>>> diverged too much.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Downside:
>> >>>>>> Backward compatibility might be broken for 1.1.x and 1.0.x. Not
>> >> sure for
>> >>>>>> 1.1.x, but at least 1.0.x, since supported Kafka client version is
>> >>>>>> different, and if my memory is right, we already applied backward
>> >>>>>> incompatible change into storm-kafka-client 1.1.0.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Please put your opinion regarding topic. You're encouraged to copy
>> >> your
>> >>>>>> previous post in vote thread which helps to centralize opinions in
>> >>>>> current
>> >>>>>> thread.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Thanks,
>> >>>>>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>
>>
>>

Reply via email to