I agree, it's time to release and get moving with completing the migration to Apache. Once those issues are merged let's do a release.
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Bobby Evans <[email protected]> wrote: > I have done a bit of CI work in apache for hadoop before and I still have > power to set up new builds/etc on builds.apache.org, so I am happy to > volunteer my services once the repository is migrated to apache. I am not > sure how fancy we want to get with pre commit builds etc. a lot of that > probably depends on how we plan on doing issue tracking/submitting pull > requests. > > --Bobby > > On 11/26/13 11:37 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >Agreed. > > > >I think one of the top priorities will be to work with Apache INFRA to > >get some sort of CI environment set up. > > > >- Taylor > > > >On Nov 27, 2013, at 12:19 AM, James Xu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> I agree it’s time to release and the unit test should pass before > >>release. (I just released that we don’t have Travis CI like many other > >>open source projects have). > >> > >> On 2013年11月27日, at 下午1:15, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> It’s been over two months since Storm has entered the Apache incubator. > >>> > >>> I think it’s time to release 0.9.0 and move forward with adopting the > >>>Apache process for releasing, getting IP clearance, etc. > >>> > >>> I’ve not seen much feedback from the community on the release > >>>candidates, but from what I’ve seen 0.9.0-rc3 is pretty solid. > >>> > >>> That being said, there are two remaining issues that I think should be > >>>addressed: > >>> > >>> 1. https://github.com/nathanmarz/storm/pull/726 > >>> > >>> I’ve not seen this reproduced, but I think it is valid and should be > >>>addressed (see my comments in the pull request). I’m okay if we just > >>>eliminate the possibility for negative sleep values for now. We can > >>>change the implementation later to back off in a predictable way. > >>> > >>> 2. https://github.com/nathanmarz/storm/pull/755 > >>> > >>> This is arguably cosmetic, but I feel unit tests should pass for any > >>>release. (I’d also like to change the release script so it fails if any > >>>unit tests don’t pass ― I can create an issue for that, and take on the > >>>work). > >>> > >>> I’m open to suggestions to any other pull requests/issues that anyone > >>>feels should be included. > >>> > >>> If there are any critical bugs discovered in 0.9.0, we can always > >>>release a bug fix release (e.g. 0.9.0.x) outside of Apache. > >>> > >>> In a nutshell, I think we need to decide whether we want to fish or > >>>cut bait in terms of the move to Apache. I don’t want to see Storm > >>>stagnate in the incubator. > >>> > >>> I look forward to hearing others’ thoughts on the matter. > >>> > >>> - Taylor > >> > > > > -- Twitter: @nathanmarz http://nathanmarz.com
