Update: I just merged the patch for 1.1.x-branch so release phase of Storm 1.1.2 can be restarted. Patch for 1.0.x-branch from Erik is available and got some +1s but waiting for 24hrs rule.
2018년 2월 7일 (수) 오전 5:03, Stig Rohde Døssing <[email protected]>님이 작성: > Took a look at backporting to 1.0.x. We'll have to update the time > simulation code (Time.java in storm-core) to support nanoseconds, as Erik > noted, but this isn't a breaking change and only affects tests. > > This PR https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1995/files#diff- > 72647db30ffd6005dc01c4d1f75d2c68 made a breaking change to > IOpaquePartitionedTridentSpoutExecutor, so we'll have to do the same on > 1.0.x. > > 2018-02-06 19:13 GMT+01:00 P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]>: > > > Just a heads up: While this gets sorted out I’m going to proceed with a > > 1.2.0 RC. > > > > -Taylor > > > > > On Feb 5, 2018, at 10:46 PM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > UPDATE: Submitted a pull request https://github.com/apache/ > > storm/pull/2549 for > > > STORM-2936 (against 1.1.x-branch) > > > > > > Erik, please change the status to "IN PROGRESS" if someone is working > > on. I > > > would find the free time and just do it if there's no one working in > > > progress. > > > > > > 2018년 2월 6일 (화) 오전 10:39, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]>님이 작성: > > > > > >> Thanks for quick response Erik! > > >> > > >> Just filed two issues : > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2936 (for 1.1.x-branch) > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2937 (for 1.0.x-branch) > > >> > > >> We have another discussion around making storm-kafka-client be > > experiment > > >> of managing separately (independent of Storm release). So the three > > >> versions which are in release phase might be the last releases of > > >> "battery-included" of storm-kafka-client if our experiment works well. > > >> > > >> If we would want to make the change for storm-kafka-client, it might > be > > >> better to put the change and release before start experimenting, but > > that's > > >> just a thought on my own. In opposite way, we could even start > > experiment > > >> and make change of storm-core of 1.0.x-branch to be compatible with > that > > >> version of storm-kafka-client. We could even do it for 1.1.x-branch, > but > > >> the change is almost done so it doesn't look like needed to postpone > it. > > >> > > >> Would like to here everyone's voice on this. > > >> > > >> -Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > > >> > > >> 2018년 2월 6일 (화) 오전 10:23, Erik Weathers <[email protected] > > >님이 > > >> 작성: > > >> > > >>> Thanks for the quick response Jungtaek! > > >>> > > >>> Yes, my teammates and myself would like to help on this. Is there an > > >>> existing JIRA for the work you've been doing on the other branches? > > >>> > > >>> I propose we don't make this block 1.0.6 -- we can just release 1.0.7 > > >>> quickly when the backport is done, if that is amenable. > > >>> That strategy also might be cleaner since it would avoid other > changes > > in > > >>> 1.0.6 being lumped together with this. > > >>> > > >>> - Erik > > >>> > > >>> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 5:16 PM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> UPDATE: I've finished working on overwriting storm-kafka-client > > >>> 1.x-branch > > >>>> to 1.1.x-branch. Not yet pushed to ASF git, but pushed to my fork > > first > > >>> to > > >>>> trigger Travis CI to see how the build goes well. > > >>>> > > >>>> https://github.com/HeartSaVioR/storm/commit/76b8a7d3a6f91e66 > > >>>> 612e87da8589f5723f05218a > > >>>> https://travis-ci.org/HeartSaVioR/storm/builds/337819430 > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks for the input regarding 1.0.x version, Erik. I guess then we > > >>> have no > > >>>> alternative here: someone has to fix storm-kafka-client as well as > > >>>> storm-core, since including shaded storm-core doesn't make sense for > > >>>> official Storm release. > > >>>> > > >>>> I guess it doesn't take many hour(s), hence may not worth to sync > and > > >>> talk > > >>>> offline. I just wanted to judge whether we are OK to make change of > > >>>> storm-core in bugfix version lines, but maybe the judgement itself > can > > >>> be > > >>>> possible after finishing the change, so I'll just go ahead making > the > > >>>> change. > > >>>> Since this is blocking release candidate, we should get it ASAP. > > That's > > >>> why > > >>>> I'm eager to go ahead making the change. If you could spend time now > > >>>> helping with making the change ASAP, please leave short notice > (maybe > > >>> with > > >>>> JIRA issue?) and go ahead. > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks, > > >>>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > > >>>> > > >>>> 2018년 2월 6일 (화) 오전 9:41, Erik Weathers > <[email protected] > > >>>> 님이 > > >>>> 작성: > > >>>> > > >>>>> hey Jungtaek, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Thanks for continuing to pursue this! > > >>>>> > > >>>>> The issue for Storm not working on Mesos is due to a fundamental > > >>> change > > >>>> to > > >>>>> the core scheduling logic in Storm: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> - > > >>>>> > > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2126?focusedComm > > >>>> entId=16136150&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. > > >>>> issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-16136150 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> The yet-to-be-ironed-out solution that Bobby was brainstorming > about > > >>>> isn't > > >>>>> a short term fix as far as I understand it. I believe it to be > many > > >>> many > > >>>>> months (years?) out for it to actually be workable. Per my naive > > >>>>> understanding of the proposal, we'd probably have to completely > > >>> rewrite > > >>>> the > > >>>>> Storm-on-Mesos framework. So it's probably the right long-term > > >>> solution, > > >>>>> but it isn't anything that should impact this discussion. > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> The thing is, even users pick storm-kafka-client 1.1.x/1.2.0 and > > >>>> include > > >>>>> it into their topology jar, it will also not work with Storm 1.0.x. > > It > > >>>>> even can't > > >>>>> compile. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> FWIW, I'm pretty sure that I was able to successfully run > > >>>>> storm-kafka-client-1.1.x on a 1.0.5 storm cluster, but only after > > >>> shading > > >>>>> in storm-core-1.1.x to the topology uber jar. There was *at > least* > > a > > >>>>> change to some timer-related class in storm-core in 1.1.x > (something > > >>>> about > > >>>>> milliseconds IIRC -- it's been 1.5 months since I did it, need to > > >>> revisit > > >>>>> the process I followed). > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I'm happy to help with backporting / stomping storm-kafka-client in > > >>>> 1.0.x. > > >>>>> Maybe we can talk offline about it? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> - Erik > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 4:20 PM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> UPDATE: Looks like we changed some parts of storm-core while > fixing > > >>>>>> storm-kafka-client issues (especially went in 1.1.0), hence > > >>> overwriting > > >>>>>> also incurs changes of storm-core. It doesn't look like a big deal > > >>> for > > >>>>>> 1.1.x-branch, but there looks like needed many changes for > > >>>> 1.0.x-branch. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> The thing is, even users pick storm-kafka-client 1.1.x/1.2.0 and > > >>>> include > > >>>>> it > > >>>>>> into their topology jar, it will also not work with Storm 1.0.x. > It > > >>>> even > > >>>>>> can't compile. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> 1.0.x version line was long lived (22 months) even we released > Storm > > >>>>> 1.1.0 > > >>>>>> at 11 months ago. Instead of struggling 1.0.x-branch to up to > date, > > >>> I'd > > >>>>>> like to suggest that we define 1.0.x-branch as deprecated with > > >>> guiding > > >>>> to > > >>>>>> update to latest 1.1.x version or 1.2.0 (after release), and try > to > > >>>>> resolve > > >>>>>> storm-mesos issue with Storm 1.1.0 ASAP to resolve Erik's concern. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Makes sense? I'll continue working on 1.1.x-branch and update > > >>> anyway. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> -Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> 2018년 2월 6일 (화) 오전 7:53, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]>님이 작성: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> 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) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > >
