Re: [VOTE] Move project to Apache GitBox service

[Nicolas Donatucci]

+1

On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 4:11 PM, David McLaughlin 
wrote:

> +1
>
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:19 AM, Jordan Ly  wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Renan DelValle 
> wrote:
> > > Kicking the vote off with a +1 from me since I feel it will simplify
> our
> > > patch submission process and lower the difficulty bar for new
> > contributors.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:14 AM Renan DelValle 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> All,
> > >>
> > >> I propose we move our project into the GitBox service. This will allow
> > us
> > >> to read and write to our repositories on the GitHub platform enabling
> > us to
> > >> accept pull requests for both the aurora and aurora-packaging
> > repositories.
> > >>
> > >> If this vote passes, the pull request workflow will replace our
> current
> > >> ReviewBoard patch submission process.
> > >>
> > >> The vote will close on Tuesday Jun 19th 2018 at 11:30:00 San Francisco
> > >> time.
> > >>
> > >> [ ] +1 Move the aurora and aurora-packaging repositories to the Apache
> > >> GitBox service
> > >> [ ] +0
> > >> [ ] -1 Keep the aurora and aurora-packaging repositories on GitHub as
> a
> > >> read only mirrors because...
> > >>
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Discontinue Official Binary Package releases

[Nicolas Donatucci]

+1

On Fri, May 18, 2018, 22:49 Bill Farner  wrote:

> +1
>
> > On May 18, 2018, at 6:44 PM, Renan DelValle  wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 6:35 PM, Mauricio Garavaglia <
> > mauriciogaravag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >>> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 8:01 PM, Renan DelValle 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> All,
> >>>
> >>> As has been brought up before, we lack the capacity to continue to hold
> >>> votes separately for releases and binary releases.
> >>>
> >>> Therefore, I propose that we stop release binary packages until such a
> >>> time
> >>> as when we can combine voting for release packages and binary packages
> >>> into
> >>> a single vote.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The vote will close on Wed May 25th 16:00:00 PST 2018
> >>>
> >>> [ ] +1 Discontinue Official Binary packages releases
> >>> [ ] +0
> >>> [ ] -1 Continue Official Binary packages releases because...
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>

Re: Adding support for Mesos' Kill Policy when running docker executor-less tasks.

[Nicolas Donatucci]

Hi.

Have there been any news on this issue?

On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:10 PM, Mauricio Garavaglia <
mauriciogaravag...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Some progress in 'Executor-less docker containers' would be great, in it's
> current form is kind of useless as you can't specify the CMD
> <https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/builder/#/cmd> to pass to the
> entrypoint. I played with that a bit a while back, but didn't continue
> (sorry) to make the CLI work properly with missing Process; which I think
> is something that John's patch addresses. See
> https://github.com/medallia/aurora/commit/bd5938590fea3a9a7b2db5d2ff8c6c
> d981b0e0c1
>
> The cmd to run was included as part of the Docker container struct like:
> Container(docker = Docker(image = "docker/whalesay", parameters=p,
> command="hello world")))
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Renan DelValle <rdelv...@binghamton.edu>
> wrote:
>
> > I think adding the kill policy to the Thrift API is fine. For the first
> > pass, I don't think it's a big deal to just keep it as a feature in the
> > Thrift API.
> >
> > However, we should also have a discussion on how we should integrate the
> > increasing number of Thrift APIs missing from the main Aurora client.
> (Mea
> > culpa: I'm probably one of the guiltiest parties of neglecting this
> > aspect.)
> >
> > Now that AURORA-1288 has shipped, we should consider reviving discussion
> on
> > John's patch and even extending it.
> >
> > Additional planning is definitely needed IF we plan to integrate (off the
> > top of my head):
> > * Custom Executors (At least rudimentary support, i.e.: Name + Data blob,
> > and also include the command-executor)
> > * Executor-less docker containers
> > * URI Fetcher
> > * Kill Policy
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Erb, Stephan <
> stephan@blue-yonder.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I will try to summarize an off-list discussion so that more people can
> > > participate:
> > >
> > > Aurora has an unofficial way to launch Docker containers without
> Thermos.
> > > Rather than using the Thermos executor, Mesos will directly call the
> > > container entrypoint. This support was contributed by Bill (
> > > https://reviews.apache.org/r/44685/ ). An additional patch by John (
> > > https://reviews.apache.org/r/44745/ ) to expose this functionality
> > within
> > > the client job configuration was discarded due to missing consensus at
> > the
> > > time. This means, the entrypoint mode is only available for REST API
> > users,
> > > and for users with patched clients.
> > >
> > > The goal of Nicolás is now to provide a graceful shutdown for
> containers
> > > running without Thermos. He has prepared a minimal patch that sketches
> > the
> > > idea https://github.com/apache/aurora/compare/master...
> > > medallia:KillPolicyGracePeriod.
> > >
> > > How do we want to proceed here? Do we plan to improve our Docker
> > > entrypoint story? If yes, can we just re-open Johns RB and merge an
> > > extended version of Nicolás change, or do we need some additional
> > planning?
> > >
> > > I am happy to hear what you think.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 29/12/2016, 16:48, "Nicolas Donatucci" <ndonatu...@medallia.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello everybody.
> > >
> > > I was thinking on adding support for the current Mesos' Grace
> Period
> > > Kill
> > > Policy when running Docker containers without Thermos. It is
> > currently
> > > the
> > > only Kill Policy implemented by Mesos. (More information can be
> found
> > > here
> > > https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/CHANGELOG#L576-L585
> and
> > > JIRA
> > > issue here https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4909)
> > >
> > > My idea is to add a Kill Policy to TaskConfig in order to pass it
> on
> > to
> > > Mesos. The "finalization_wait" field of the task schema can be used
> > to
> > > create the corresponding Kill Policy.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Adding support for Mesos' Kill Policy when running docker executor-less tasks.

[Nicolas Donatucci]

Hello everybody.

I was thinking on adding support for the current Mesos' Grace Period Kill
Policy when running Docker containers without Thermos. It is currently the
only Kill Policy implemented by Mesos. (More information can be found here
https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/CHANGELOG#L576-L585 and JIRA
issue here https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4909)

My idea is to add a Kill Policy to TaskConfig in order to pass it on to
Mesos. The "finalization_wait" field of the task schema can be used to
create the corresponding Kill Policy.

What do you think?