Awesome. I'm looking forward to getting 0.9.0 out.

BTW, I have a trivial pull request open (#759) that I'd like to merge, but it's 
not a big deal.

- Taylor

> On Nov 27, 2013, at 5:56 PM, Nathan Marz <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 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

Reply via email to