@Ted: When you get that PR out, I will immediately focus on reviewing it. 
Please make sure your branch has master/ merged into it so we know we know that 
if the code/design is good, then there won’t be any hiccups on merge.

*** Also, benchmarks that dropping paths is “good” will be very important so 
hopefully you have that coming too.

Thanks,
Marko.

http://markorodriguez.com



> On Jul 6, 2016, at 8:07 AM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> We're starting to go through reviews now with some earnest. Unless there
> are concerns, I think that we should target code freeze for Friday at this
> point.
> 
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Ted Wilmes <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Quick update, I plan on getting a PR in late tonight or tomorrow morning
>> for 1254.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Ted
>> 
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Thanks for the update Ted. We may need an extra day or two to clear up
>> some
>>> other discussion on some of the other PRs - i don't think we can start a
>>> code freeze on Monday as I'd proposed.
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Ted Wilmes <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>> I had some time this week and made further progress on 1254.  Still
>>> working
>>>> out some kinks but I'll see how far I can get over the weekend.  Have a
>>>> good 4th.
>>>> 
>>>> --Ted
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Marko Rodriguez <
>> [email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ted — I think we should get that work into the next release. Thus, if
>>> you
>>>>> need more time (reasonable amount), then I say we delay accordingly.
>>>>> 
>>>>> NOTE: The Gremlin-Python stuff will not get into the next release. It
>>> has
>>>>> gotten really complex/powerful and is currently 100+ commits ahead of
>>>>> master/ ! :) .. As such, given the gargantuan undertaking, we will
>> save
>>>>> this work for a future release.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Marko.
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://markorodriguez.com
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Jun 28, 2016, at 10:36 AM, Ted Wilmes <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I would like to get TinkerPop-1254 in before code freeze.  Shooting
>>> for
>>>>>> finishing it up by end of this week but I'll drop a note if it
>> looks
>>>>> like I
>>>>>> won't make it.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --Ted
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 5:35 AM, Stephen Mallette <
>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It's end of June - time to start firming up for release. We have a
>>>>> number
>>>>>>> of outstanding PRs that need votes/merge. Perhaps we try to get
>>> those
>>>>> all
>>>>>>> in this week and begin code freeze next Monday (7/4)?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I think we'll have to postpone the GLV work with gremlin-python
>> for
>>>> this
>>>>>>> release. There's just too much left to do to get that in "right".
>>> Are
>>>>> there
>>>>>>> any other open issues of importance?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Marko Rodriguez <
>>> [email protected]
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Yes, end of June-ish is best for me as I have few things on my
>>> plate
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> first half of this month.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Marko.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> http://markorodriguez.com
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Jun 6, 2016, at 4:46 AM, Stephen Mallette <
>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> We didn't really discuss a date for release on this thread. I
>> was
>>>>>>>> thinking
>>>>>>>>> that we could start looking at the week of July 4th as the
>> target
>>>> week
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> VOTE and nail down a date as we get closer.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Jason Plurad <
>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I'd think from a TinkerPop branding perspective, it probably
>>> helps
>>>> to
>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>> the name in there. It's Apache TinkerPop, not Apache Gremlin.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I just took a quick look on a mirror, and some other Apache
>>>> projects
>>>>>>>>>> (Spark, Kafka, HBase, NiFi, Pig, Zookeeper) don't even include
>>>> apache
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> their distributables, so maybe we can just do:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> tinkerpop-gremlin-console-x.y.z.zip
>>>>>>>>>> tinkerpop-gremlin-server-x.y.z.zip
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 11:03 AM Stephen Mallette <
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> jason i think that was a suggestion to conform more to
>> standard
>>>>>>> apache
>>>>>>>>>>> releases from someone in incubator. if it was mandatory we
>> would
>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>> burned for that too many times to count at this point. i'm
>> good
>>> to
>>>>>>>> change
>>>>>>>>>>> it if everyone else is. what do we want them to be?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> apache-tinkerpop-console-x.y.z.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> apache-tinkerpop-server-x.y.z.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> or the full business:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> apache-tinkerpop-gremlin-console-x.y.z.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> apache-tinkerpop-gremlin-server-x.y.z.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> i guess we lost "-incubating" now so the latter doesn't look
>> so
>>>> bad
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> me
>>>>>>>>>>> anymore.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Marko Rodriguez <
>>>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, an imminent release is good. There are 2 severe bug
>> fixes
>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> master/
>>>>>>>>>>>> (3.2.1) that I would like to get out there. 3.2.0 had lots of
>>>>>>> internal
>>>>>>>>>>>> changes to OLAP and I paid the price by incurring bugs. :|
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Somebody had mentioned that our distributables are supposed
>> to
>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>> named
>>>>>>>>>>>>> apache-tinkerpop*.zip instead of apache-gremlin*.zip. Maybe
>>>> that's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> something that should be done along with this release.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> There is really no such thing as "tinkerpop" besides the
>> source
>>>>> code
>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>>> is distributed as apache-tinkerpop-*.zip. The two other
>>>>>>> distributions
>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>> gremlin-console and gremlin-server and I think we should keep
>>>> those
>>>>>>>>>>> naming
>>>>>>>>>>>> conventions as they are so they reflect what is being
>>>> distributed.
>>>>>>>>>> Thus,
>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>> think the naming of our artifacts is correct.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Marko.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://markorodriguez.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 25, 2016, at 8:38 AM, Jason Plurad <[email protected]
>>> 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Somebody had mentioned that our distributables are supposed
>> to
>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>> named
>>>>>>>>>>>>> apache-tinkerpop*.zip instead of apache-gremlin*.zip. Maybe
>>>> that's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> something that should be done along with this release.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Jason
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Stephen Mallette <
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cool, Ted. it would be good to have another hand there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Ted Wilmes <
>>> [email protected]
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think a release sounds good.  I'd be interested in
>>>> witnessing
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post-PMC vote release steps so that I might be able to
>> help
>>>> out
>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> upcoming release.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --Ted
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 5:35 AM, Marvin Froeder <
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your are right, for some reason I though it was on the
>>>>>>> artifactId
>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Stephen Mallette <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think we need to relocate anything. The
>>>> "-incubating"
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>> just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the version name, so we will just remove it for future
>>>>>>> releases.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 4:55 AM, Jean-Baptiste Musso <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think this is a good idea. This could make these
>>> releases
>>>>>>> look
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "stable": I've often felt that the -incubating suffix
>>>> somehow
>>>>>>>>>> made
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases look "alpha-ish" / "beta-ish", even though
>> they
>>>> were
>>>>>>>>>> not.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Naming aside, bug fixes never hurt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 12:49 AM, Stephen Mallette <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We've seen a lot of good fixes/optimizations to 3.1.3
>>> and
>>>>>>> 3.2.1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wonder if we shouldn't exercise our new found TLP
>> powers
>>>> to
>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and get rid of the "-incubating" at the end of our
>>>> "current"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> distributions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and artifacts. thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 

Reply via email to