[GitHub] [storm] Ethanlm edited a comment on issue #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT has problems

[GitBox]

Ethanlm edited a comment on issue #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT 
has problems
URL: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3012#issuecomment-515595112
 
 
   I am fine with this. Thanks


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

[GitHub] [storm] Ethanlm commented on issue #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT has problems

[GitBox]

Ethanlm commented on issue #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT has 
problems
URL: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3012#issuecomment-515595112
 
 
   I am fine with this


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

Re: [DISCUSS] Next 2.x release

[Stig Rohde Døssing]

I think ideally we've been trying for semver, but it's been pretty loose,
e.g. there were breaking changes in one of the 1.2.x releases for
storm-kafka-client. I don't know what rules we've actually been using, if
any.

Semver for binary compatibility would probably be a good rule of thumb.

Den fre. 26. jul. 2019 kl. 20.01 skrev Ethan Li :

>
> Stig,
>
> Do you know what’s the versioning standard we have been following (to
> determine a 2.0.1 release or 2.1.0 release) ?
>
>
> > On Jul 26, 2019, at 12:26 PM, Stig Rohde Døssing 
> wrote:
> >
> > Sounds great, thanks Ethan.
> >
> > Den fre. 26. jul. 2019 kl. 19.16 skrev Ethan Li <
> ethanopensou...@gmail.com>:
> >
> >> It’s good idea to do more frequent release. I can run the next release.
> >>
> >> I will take a look at both PRs. Other than that, I think we should also
> >> get https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3093 <
> >> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3093>  in the new release.
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Jul 26, 2019, at 11:58 AM, Stig Rohde Døssing <
> stigdoess...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I think we've talked about more frequent releases before. Releasing new
> >>> versions every few months means people don't have to wait long for
> fixes
> >> to
> >>> get out, and smaller releases are probably also easier for users to get
> >> to
> >>> grips with (the fix list for 2.0.0 is enormous).
> >>>
> >>> With that in mind, I think we should start looking at the next 2.x
> >> release
> >>> (2.0.1 or 2.1.0?), since it's been a couple of months since 2.0.0
> >> released.
> >>> The fix list would be
> >>>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20STORM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.0.1
> >>> .
> >>>
> >>> Govind and Ethan have offered to run the next release, and help
> validate
> >>> our release process guidelines. Would one of you have time to work on a
> >>> release in the near future?
> >>>
> >>> It would be good to take a look at currently open PRs and decide which
> we
> >>> feel need to get merged before the next release.
> >>>
> >>> I would like to see at least https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2990
> >>> merged
> >>>
> >>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878 seems like it's close to be
> >>> mergeable too?
> >>
> >>
>
>

[GitHub] [storm] srdo commented on issue #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT has problems

[GitBox]

srdo commented on issue #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT has 
problems
URL: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3012#issuecomment-515579985
 
 
   Git log for the squashed commit shows
   
   > Author: jacobtolar 
   AuthorDate: Fri Jul 26 11:49:05 2019 -0500
   Commit: Stig Døssing 
   CommitDate: Fri Jul 26 18:49:05 2019 +0200
   
   While the original commit shows
   
   > Author: jacobtolar 
   AuthorDate: Thu May 23 13:27:05 2019 -0500
   Commit: GitHub 
   CommitDate: Thu May 23 13:27:05 2019 -0500
   
   which I think is okay?


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

[GitHub] [storm] srdo commented on issue #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT has problems

[GitBox]

srdo commented on issue #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT has 
problems
URL: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3012#issuecomment-515576405
 
 
   I think we don't if multiple people have worked on a branch, e.g. if you had 
made some commits in this branch working alongside Jacob. In that case we don't 
want to squash to one commit, because we then can't tell who did what.
   
   When there's only one author, I don't think squashing is a problem. It looks 
like Github puts the real author's name on the squashed commit, and then just 
lists me as the committer. See 
https://github.com/apache/storm/commit/9f10f8a14482e4eb1c1323ac86d3c373634539c2


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

[GitHub] [storm] Ethanlm commented on a change in pull request #2878: [STORM-3257] 'storm kill' command line should be able to continue on error

[GitBox]

Ethanlm commented on a change in pull request #2878: [STORM-3257] 'storm kill' 
command line should be able to continue on error
URL: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878#discussion_r307881776
 
 

 ##
 File path: storm-core/src/jvm/org/apache/storm/command/KillTopology.java
 ##
 @@ -25,21 +25,49 @@
 
 public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
 Map cl = CLI.opt("w", "wait", null, CLI.AS_INT)
+.boolOpt("i", "ignore-errors")
 .arg("TOPO", CLI.INTO_LIST)
 .parse(args);
+
+@SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
 final List names = (List) cl.get("TOPO");
+
+// Wait this many seconds after deactivating topology before killing
 Integer wait = (Integer) cl.get("w");
 
+// if '-i' is set, we'll try to kill every topology listed, even if an 
error occurs
+Boolean continueOnError = (Boolean) cl.get("i");
+
 final KillOptions opts = new KillOptions();
 if (wait != null) {
 opts.set_wait_secs(wait);
 }
+
 NimbusClient.withConfiguredClient(new NimbusClient.WithNimbus() {
 @Override
 public void run(Nimbus.Iface nimbus) throws Exception {
+int errorCount = 0;
 for (String name : names) {
-nimbus.killTopologyWithOpts(name, opts);
-LOG.info("Killed topology: {}", name);
+try {
+nimbus.killTopologyWithOpts(name, opts);
+LOG.info("Killed topology: {}", name);
+} catch (Exception e) {
+errorCount += 1;
+if (!continueOnError) {
+throw e;
+} else {
+LOG.info(
 
 Review comment:
   Is `LOG.warn` better than `info`?


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

[GitHub] [storm] Ethanlm commented on a change in pull request #2878: [STORM-3257] 'storm kill' command line should be able to continue on error

[GitBox]

Ethanlm commented on a change in pull request #2878: [STORM-3257] 'storm kill' 
command line should be able to continue on error
URL: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878#discussion_r307881776
 
 

 ##
 File path: storm-core/src/jvm/org/apache/storm/command/KillTopology.java
 ##
 @@ -25,21 +25,49 @@
 
 public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
 Map cl = CLI.opt("w", "wait", null, CLI.AS_INT)
+.boolOpt("i", "ignore-errors")
 .arg("TOPO", CLI.INTO_LIST)
 .parse(args);
+
+@SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
 final List names = (List) cl.get("TOPO");
+
+// Wait this many seconds after deactivating topology before killing
 Integer wait = (Integer) cl.get("w");
 
+// if '-i' is set, we'll try to kill every topology listed, even if an 
error occurs
+Boolean continueOnError = (Boolean) cl.get("i");
+
 final KillOptions opts = new KillOptions();
 if (wait != null) {
 opts.set_wait_secs(wait);
 }
+
 NimbusClient.withConfiguredClient(new NimbusClient.WithNimbus() {
 @Override
 public void run(Nimbus.Iface nimbus) throws Exception {
+int errorCount = 0;
 for (String name : names) {
-nimbus.killTopologyWithOpts(name, opts);
-LOG.info("Killed topology: {}", name);
+try {
+nimbus.killTopologyWithOpts(name, opts);
+LOG.info("Killed topology: {}", name);
+} catch (Exception e) {
+errorCount += 1;
+if (!continueOnError) {
+throw e;
+} else {
+LOG.info(
 
 Review comment:
   Is `LOG.info` better than `info`?


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

[GitHub] [storm] Ethanlm edited a comment on issue #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT has problems

[GitBox]

Ethanlm edited a comment on issue #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT 
has problems
URL: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3012#issuecomment-515569869
 
 
   Okay. Thanks. I thought we don't want to squash for authors. 


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

[GitHub] [storm] Ethanlm commented on issue #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT has problems

[GitBox]

Ethanlm commented on issue #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT has 
problems
URL: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3012#issuecomment-515569869
 
 
   Okay. Thanks. I thought we don't want to use squash for committers. 


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

[GitHub] [storm] agresch opened a new pull request #3094: STORM-3477 switch HDFS blobstore isRemoteBlobExists to use file exist…

[GitBox]

agresch opened a new pull request #3094: STORM-3477 switch HDFS blobstore 
isRemoteBlobExists to use file exist…
URL: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3094
 
 
   …s for lower overhead
   
   
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

Re: [DISCUSS] Next 2.x release

[Ethan Li]

Stig,

Do you know what’s the versioning standard we have been following (to determine 
a 2.0.1 release or 2.1.0 release) ?


> On Jul 26, 2019, at 12:26 PM, Stig Rohde Døssing  
> wrote:
> 
> Sounds great, thanks Ethan.
> 
> Den fre. 26. jul. 2019 kl. 19.16 skrev Ethan Li :
> 
>> It’s good idea to do more frequent release. I can run the next release.
>> 
>> I will take a look at both PRs. Other than that, I think we should also
>> get https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3093 <
>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3093>  in the new release.
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jul 26, 2019, at 11:58 AM, Stig Rohde Døssing 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I think we've talked about more frequent releases before. Releasing new
>>> versions every few months means people don't have to wait long for fixes
>> to
>>> get out, and smaller releases are probably also easier for users to get
>> to
>>> grips with (the fix list for 2.0.0 is enormous).
>>> 
>>> With that in mind, I think we should start looking at the next 2.x
>> release
>>> (2.0.1 or 2.1.0?), since it's been a couple of months since 2.0.0
>> released.
>>> The fix list would be
>>> 
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20STORM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.0.1
>>> .
>>> 
>>> Govind and Ethan have offered to run the next release, and help validate
>>> our release process guidelines. Would one of you have time to work on a
>>> release in the near future?
>>> 
>>> It would be good to take a look at currently open PRs and decide which we
>>> feel need to get merged before the next release.
>>> 
>>> I would like to see at least https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2990
>>> merged
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878 seems like it's close to be
>>> mergeable too?
>> 
>> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Next 2.x release

[Stig Rohde Døssing]

Sounds great, thanks Ethan.

Den fre. 26. jul. 2019 kl. 19.16 skrev Ethan Li :

> It’s good idea to do more frequent release. I can run the next release.
>
> I will take a look at both PRs. Other than that, I think we should also
> get https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3093 <
> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3093>  in the new release.
>
>
> > On Jul 26, 2019, at 11:58 AM, Stig Rohde Døssing 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think we've talked about more frequent releases before. Releasing new
> > versions every few months means people don't have to wait long for fixes
> to
> > get out, and smaller releases are probably also easier for users to get
> to
> > grips with (the fix list for 2.0.0 is enormous).
> >
> > With that in mind, I think we should start looking at the next 2.x
> release
> > (2.0.1 or 2.1.0?), since it's been a couple of months since 2.0.0
> released.
> > The fix list would be
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20STORM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.0.1
> > .
> >
> > Govind and Ethan have offered to run the next release, and help validate
> > our release process guidelines. Would one of you have time to work on a
> > release in the near future?
> >
> > It would be good to take a look at currently open PRs and decide which we
> > feel need to get merged before the next release.
> >
> > I would like to see at least https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2990
> > merged
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878 seems like it's close to be
> > mergeable too?
>
>

[GitHub] [storm] srdo commented on issue #3093: STORM-3476 don't query remote files on cleanup if target size is acce…

[GitBox]

srdo commented on issue #3093: STORM-3476 don't query remote files on cleanup 
if target size is acce…
URL: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3093#issuecomment-515535104
 
 
   +1, I guess there's no harm to not cleaning up unused blobs unless we're 
over the size limit.


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

Re: [DISCUSS] Next 2.x release

[Ethan Li]

It’s good idea to do more frequent release. I can run the next release. 

I will take a look at both PRs. Other than that, I think we should also get 
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3093 
  in the new release. 


> On Jul 26, 2019, at 11:58 AM, Stig Rohde Døssing  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I think we've talked about more frequent releases before. Releasing new
> versions every few months means people don't have to wait long for fixes to
> get out, and smaller releases are probably also easier for users to get to
> grips with (the fix list for 2.0.0 is enormous).
> 
> With that in mind, I think we should start looking at the next 2.x release
> (2.0.1 or 2.1.0?), since it's been a couple of months since 2.0.0 released.
> The fix list would be
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20STORM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.0.1
> .
> 
> Govind and Ethan have offered to run the next release, and help validate
> our release process guidelines. Would one of you have time to work on a
> release in the near future?
> 
> It would be good to take a look at currently open PRs and decide which we
> feel need to get merged before the next release.
> 
> I would like to see at least https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2990
> merged
> 
> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878 seems like it's close to be
> mergeable too?

[DISCUSS] Next 2.x release

[Stig Rohde Døssing]

Hi,

I think we've talked about more frequent releases before. Releasing new
versions every few months means people don't have to wait long for fixes to
get out, and smaller releases are probably also easier for users to get to
grips with (the fix list for 2.0.0 is enormous).

With that in mind, I think we should start looking at the next 2.x release
(2.0.1 or 2.1.0?), since it's been a couple of months since 2.0.0 released.
The fix list would be
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20STORM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.0.1
.

Govind and Ethan have offered to run the next release, and help validate
our release process guidelines. Would one of you have time to work on a
release in the near future?

It would be good to take a look at currently open PRs and decide which we
feel need to get merged before the next release.

I would like to see at least https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2990
merged

https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878 seems like it's close to be
mergeable too?

[GitHub] [storm] srdo commented on issue #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT has problems

[GitBox]

srdo commented on issue #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT has 
problems
URL: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3012#issuecomment-515524126
 
 
   Thanks @jacobtolar, merged.
   
   @Ethanlm I think if you link your Github account to your Apache id, you can 
edit PR summaries, and we can use squash and merge to edit commit messages 
before merge. 


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

[GitHub] [storm] srdo merged pull request #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT has problems

[GitBox]

srdo merged pull request #3012: MINOR: Clarify error message when TGT has 
problems
URL: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3012
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

[GitHub] [storm] srdo merged pull request #3091: STORM-3472: Add tests missing for STORM-3411, make the download file name generat…

[GitBox]

srdo merged pull request #3091: STORM-3472: Add tests missing for STORM-3411, 
make the download file name generat…
URL: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3091
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services