On 03/05/2012 02:22 PM, Mike Percy wrote:
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 6:17 PM, Juhani Connolly<
[email protected]> wrote:
When I first got involved in the project, and actually managed to
familiarise myself with the codebase and outstanding issues somewhat, one
of my greatest concerns was that it seemed like some of the core initial
objectives for FLUME-728 seem to have fallen by the wayside in favor of
feature creep.
What do you think about starting a thread to discuss the roadmap for Flume
1.1.0 and beyond? Prioritization is important, as well as agreement on what
makes sense to target for the next release. I bet you will hear resounding
agreement if you say something along the lines of system stability,
performance, and API definition / stabilization for clients of Flume.
Good call, I think we definitely should figure out a roadmap for
1.1.0... What we need to prioritize, and what can be pushed back till
later.
Further, with the JDBC channel and memory channel we have a hard choice
between a flimsy channel with the potential for high dataloss and a
heavyweight one with only moderate throughput... The FileChannel issue has
been more or less stationary. Where are we going with this? Do we not
consider it particularly important, or is it just stationary because it is
a hard problem? If the latter, hopefully we could kick off some discussion
on how to deal with it.
If this is something you are interested in, you should definitely kick off
a continued design discussion for the FileChannel. You are right that
FLUME-896 hasn't gotten much attention recently. I see in that Jira that
Eric suggested submitting a FEP design document... something to consider.
I shall look into that... I didn't want to push too hard on it as I'm
sure Eric is busy too.
Finally, it seems like every single issue is reported as major, when it
really isn't the case for many of them. Many issues also do not have a
version number attached. It makes prioritizing anything to work on awkward,
perhaps we should be taking more liberties with recategorizing the severity
of issues? If others also feel this way I would like to sort through the
current open major tickets and recategorize some so we can focus work on
the core issues.
I think it's because Major happens to be the default severity. I don't
think it would hurt to move any open Jiras affecting NG alpha releases to
affecting v1.0.0, and changing the severity of issues based on your
judgement of the impact. But I think prioritization and target versions for
issues will largely fall out of a combination of a roadmap discussion and
having people available to work on them.
Regards,
Mike
That would make sense
