Re: Using a config file to support custom executors: potential paradigm shift

+1 to #1 for the short term, but I'd like us to assess #3 in the long term. On Thursday, July 2, 2015, Zameer Manji zma...@apache.org wrote: I am in favor of #1 to prevent yak shaving. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Bill Farner wfar...@apache.org javascript:; wrote: Thanks for starting

Summary of IRC Meeting in #aurora

No one with karma was around to kick off an official meeting, so we had an ad-hoc meeting. Here's the transcript: 11:01 jcohen: ASFBot: meeting start 11:01 ASFBot: You don't have enough karma for this request 11:01 jcohen: didn’t think so! 11:01 zmanji: ASFBot: meeting start 11:01 ASFBot: You

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.9.0 RC0

+0, I've got an local environment issue that's preventing me from verifying the Python side of things, but the Java side looks good! If I have time to track down the environment issue I'll re-run the tests and come back here, but don't want to block the release if it's working for others. On

Re: Aurora React UI Demo/Prototype

than zero chance that there's room for improvement with the way the demo is implemented. but I think it serves as a good starting point for a discussion about whether this style of application is palatable. Cheers, Joshua On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Joshua Cohen jco...@twopensource.com wrote

Aurora React UI Demo/Prototype

As mentioned during the IRC meeting earlier this week. I spent some time recently putting together a React-driven UI prototype as a strawman for a discussion about potentially moving away from Angular for the UI. This prototype is now available on Github: https://github.com/jcohen/aurora-react .

Re: Aurora React UI Demo/Prototype

is the transpiler used by the demo). This sounds very fancy and cutting-edge. Sometimes fancy and cutting-edge things are not ready for prime time. What gives you confidence that this is stable and will not result in trailblazing on our part? -=Bill On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Joshua Cohen jco

Re: Aurora React UI Demo/Prototype

, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Joshua Cohen jco...@twopensource.com wrote: There are numerous large and stable sites powered by this technology. Not least among them are Facebook and Instagram for which these technologies were developed (that being React/Flux). ES6 being transpiled down to ES5 is widely

IRC Meeting notes for October 12th

No one with karma was around to start the meeting official, here are the ad-hoc meeting notes: Mon Oct 12 18:07:58 2015 jcohen: Hi folks, it seems that no one with karma is around to officially start the meeting, so let’s have an ad-hoc meeting and I’ll manually send out note. Mon Oct 12

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.9.0 debs

TIL that all of 127/8 is bound to the loopback interface, so while non-standard, apparently 127.0.1.1 should (and, I just confirmed that it does) work just fine. So... sorry for the spam, but changing my vote to +1. On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@twopensource.com>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.9.0 debs

I'm -1 to these debs. I was not able to get aurora up and running in vagrant using them, which is probably due to issues on my end, but regardless, in /etc/aurora/clusters.json, the default value for "zk" is set to "127.01.1" which at the very least should be corrected? On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.9.0 rpms

Thanks for the vagrant VM and the verification instructions. Made life much easier! I was able to install the rpm and successfully create a job, stat and kill a job. +1 from me! On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Bill Farner wrote: > Thanks for chiming in! This vote is

Re: Upgrading from 0.7

Filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1497 to add documentation on how best to upgrade the various Aurora components. On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Joseph Smith wrote: > We also shut down all of the schedulers, upgrade to the new version, then > bring them

Re: [RFC] REST / thrift & AURORA-987

John: I share David's concerns, but it's not clear to me that they're incompatible with your proposal. I.e. we could design the new REST API according to any interface we like and still implement that API on top of the thrift API (though the desired interface should always be our guide, we should

Re: Commits without reviews

It could be, I just think it's easier to comment on a reviewboard than it is a commits@ email. On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Bill Farner <wfar...@apache.org> wrote: > Can that be handled by subscribing to commits@? > > On Thursday, December 24, 2015, Joshua Cohen <jco...

Re: Ticket cleanup

I'm not sure I agree with this sentiment. I don't have any problems with an aspirational backlog of tickets. At the very least it's a place to refer people who request commonly asked for features. Perhaps the solution isn't to close tickets that we don't imagine will see attention in the immediate

Re: Commits without reviews

I'm generally ok with this. Just curious: what do you think about maybe posting a review and then committing it right away in these cases though? A bit noisy on the reviews@ list, but at least it'd give people a chance to peruse/comment as they see fit (with the assumption that any comments would

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.11.0 RC1

+1 non-binding On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Bill Farner wrote: > Looks like it was orphaned - not linked against the RC ticket and not > listed as a blocker of https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1367. > I'll move the ticket underneath it to the 0.12.0. > > On

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.10.0-1 debs

Yeah, I agree, that would be preferable. On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 12:27 PM, John Sirois <j...@conductant.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > One minor nit, not sure if it's worth fixing:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.10.0-1 debs

+1 One minor nit, not sure if it's worth fixing: test/deb/ubuntu-trusty/README.md still references 0.9.0, should be updated to 0.10.0? On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 12:54 PM, John Sirois wrote: > On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Bill Farner wrote: > > > I

Re: [PROPOSAL] Replace commons-args

I'm in favor of this proposal and will be very happy to see commons-args go away :). On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 6:53 AM, John Sirois wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 9:49 PM, Bill Farner wrote: > > > Any other thoughts on this? I will proceed with initial

Re: Aurora 0.14.0 release

+1 to releasing 0.14.0 and thanks for volunteering to act as RM, Stephan! On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Jake Farrell wrote: > Take a look at the "Creating a release" section in docs/development/ > committers-guide.md, you will also need to add you GPG key to the >

Re: [PROPOSAL] Amend 0.12.0 release goals

Sounds good to me. On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Erb, Stephan wrote: > +1 for catching up > > From: John Sirois > Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 4:18 PM > To: dev@aurora.apache.org > Subject: Re:

Re: [PROPOSAL] Job instance scaling APIs

What happens if a job has been scaled out, but the underlying config is not updated to take that scaling into account? Would the next update on that job revert the number of instances (presumably, because what else could we do)? Is there anything we can do, tooling-wise, to improve upon this? On

Re: Further thoughts on config deprecations

> To: dev@aurora.apache.org > Subject: Re: Further thoughts on config deprecations > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > > > How would folks feel about requiring any changes that deprecate job > config > > to include some so

Re: NEWS Layout

+1 On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Bill Farner wrote: > +1 > > On Tuesday, February 2, 2016, Erb, Stephan > wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I'd like to propose that we give our NEWS file a little bit more > > structure. Currently, it is quite

Re: Deprecation Cycles

far...@apache.org> wrote: > Sounds reasonable. Can you firm up the proposal and apply numbers? > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > > > This came up briefly last week, and we also discussed in the IRC meeting > > today. Gi

Re: Rollback Testing

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1608 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1609 On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 7:42 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > Ok, I'll file a ticket to at least track the intent. We'll see if I have > time to work on it or if it jus

Re: Rollback Testing

packaging builds take advantage of this. > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > > > I know the blocker for e2e tests in CI previously was the ability to run > > vagrant. Is running docker from CI doable today? > > > > O

Further thoughts on config deprecations

How would folks feel about requiring any changes that deprecate job config to include some sort of codemod[1]-like patch that would allow cluster operators to automatically fix deprecated fields across their company's Aurora configs? We could either leverage codemod directly, or create nicer

Re: New committer and PMC member: Stephan Erb

Welcome Stephan! On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Zhitao Li wrote: > Congrats Stephan, well deserved! > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Erb, Stephan > > wrote: > > > Awesome, thanks! Great to be on board! :-) > > > >

Compute event at Twitter HQ

Hi Aurorans[1], I'd like to call attention to an event the Compute group at Twitter is holding at the end of the month where there will be a few of Aurora/Mesos-related talks: 1. David Robinson, one of our SREs, will talk about how our small team of SREs manages what is possibly the

Re: [PROPOSAL] Supporting Mesos Universal Containers

as a whole. > > Kind Regards, > Stephan > > ____ > From: Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> > Sent: Monday, March 7, 2016 20:58 > To: dev@aurora.apache.org > Subject: [PROPOSAL] Supporting Mesos Universal Containers > > Hi all, > > I'd like to

Re: aurora job scalability

Hi Christopher, I think you already got an answer from Stephan in IRC, but just wanted to follow up for the sake of posterity (in case anyone in the future has a similar question and finds this thread). The only limit on the number of jobs that Aurora can run would currently be the amount of

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.12.0 debs

+1, verified under both test/deb environments. On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 12:18 PM, John Sirois wrote: > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Bill Farner wrote: > > > +1 > > > > Successfully installed and lightly exercised ubuntu and debian packages > in > >

Re: Compute event at Twitter HQ

, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Aurorans[1], > > I'd like to call attention to an event the Compute group at Twitter is > holding at the end of the month where there will be a few of > Aurora/Mesos-related talks: > > >1. David Robins

Re: Populate DiscoveryInfo in Mesos

Job names are not unique though, what would happen if multiple jobs had the same name (either across roles or across environments in the same role)? On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Zhitao Li wrote: > Stephan, > > So I've managed to run the official Mesos DNS docker

Re: [PROPOSAL] Support GPU resources in Aurora

+1 On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:41 PM, Maxim Khutornenko wrote: > Mesos community is finalizing their MVP for supporting GPUs: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4424 > Design doc: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/10GJ1A80x4nIEo8kfdeo9B11PIbS1xJrrB4Z373Ifkpo/edit >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.13.0 RC0

Ahh, thanks for being on top of that John! On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 3:05 PM, John Sirois <john.sir...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > > > +1, ran the verification script, everything looks good to me. > &

Re: Looking for feedback - Setting CommandInfo.user by default when launching tasks.

As things stand today, once a task is scheduled, the scheduler can die, or be shut down for maintenance, etc. with no impact to running tasks. If the scheduler were responsible for announcing and it maintained the current practice of creating znodes as ephemeral, it would need to maintain a

Re: Handling migrations if dbScript exists in snapshot?

t it (and normally they are complaining quite > > fast ;) )... > > > > Another thing that's similar to flyway is http://www.liquibase.org/ but > for > > that I have zero experience. > > > > Flo > > > > > > On 23 March 2016 at 22:41, Joshua

[PROPOSAL] Supporting Mesos Universal Containers

Hi all, I'd like to propose we adopt the Mesos universal container support for provisioning tasks from both Docker and AppC images. Please review the doc below and let me know what you think. https://docs.google.com/document/d/111T09NBF2zjjl7HE95xglsDpRdKoZqhCRM5hHmOfTLA/edit?usp=sharing

Re: Are we ready to remove the observer?

org> wrote: > > > > 2) Providing an easy view of a process's command-line > > 3) Providing a holistic view of the task config > > > Just to check my understanding - these could be trivially handled in > text/log format, right? > > On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 9:30

Re: Handling migrations if dbScript exists in snapshot?

on github.) I opened https://github.com/mybatis/migrations/issues/38 to see about addressing that. On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > Sorry, I should've been more clear above. What I meant to say is that the > lack of explicit roll

Re: Agent / Slave renaming

+1 for me. On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 7:15 AM, Erb, Stephan wrote: > I got some spare time yesterday and used it to rebase the first of a > series of stale review requests by Kevin that implement the Mesos agent > renaming in Aurora

Heads up: Mesos 0.27 and Vagrant

Hi Aurorans, Just a heads up, I've landed the upgrade to Mesos 0.27.2. This is our first Mesos version bump since switching to a custom pre-built Vagrant box. If you try and build the Scheduler or Executor in an existing Vagrant image you'll likely run into errors. Please destroy and re-create

Re: [PROPOSAL] Switch aurora client from service discovery to HTTP redirects.

I'm not opposed to this, in fact we already do something similar internally. We've forked clusters.py to allow configuring a `proxy_url` for each cluster. If that's present, then the client will use it rather than performing service discovery to communicate with the scheduler. On Mon, Apr 18,

Re: [PROPOSAL] Switch aurora client from service discovery to HTTP redirects.

Er, it's not `proxy_url`, it's `scheduler_uri` (which makes much more sense ;)). On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > I'm not opposed to this, in fact we already do something similar > internally. We've forked clusters.py to allow configuring

Re: [PROPOSAL] Switch aurora client from service discovery to HTTP redirects.

And apparently this is not part of our fork at all, the client already supports this today! The only potential change that would be required would be ensuring the client properly follows redirects. On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 5:35 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > Er, it's not `

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move Aurora discussions to Slack?

I'm +0 on this. I agree that Slack is in many ways superior to IRC, but it also feels like the barrier to entry for Slack is much higher than it is for IRC which is potentially problematic for an open source community. On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Jake Farrell wrote: >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.15.0 RC1

+1 everything checks out w/ verify-release-candidate. On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Maxim Khutornenko wrote: > +1 > > All verification tests passed for me and scheduler has been deployed > to our test cluster. > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 6:56 PM, Maxim Khutornenko

Re: Design Doc: Mesos V1 API

Overall proposal sounds reasonable to me, thanks Zameer! My main question is whether we're setting ourselves up for possible performance regressions by switching to the HTTP API? We'll obviously need to switch eventually, but would be good to understand the performance impact (if any) of the

Aurora 0.16.0 release

Hi Aurorans, I plan to kick off the 0.16.0 release some time later this week. Please let me know if there are any outstanding patches you'd like to ship before this release. Thanks! Joshua

Re: [DRAFT][REPORT] Apache Aurora - September 2016

I think the big thing in 0.16.0, if we're calling out features it will support, is task filesystem isolation. That said, I doubt the board really cares that much about the details, so +1 from me ;). On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Maxim Khutornenko wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, Sep

Re: Aurora 0.16.0 release

t; I would like to point out that I would like to add a deprecation in this > release and there is a review out already. > https://reviews.apache.org/r/51712/ > > Otherwise it seems we are good to go for a release from my perspective. > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Joshu

Re: Aurora 0.16.0 release

gt; release? I > > > > noticed that it has been unloved for some time. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Zameer Manji <zma...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> + 1 > > > >> > > > >

Re: A mini postmortem on snapshot failures

Hi Zameer, Thanks for this writeup! I think one other option to consider would be using a connection for writing the snapshots that's not bound by the pool's maximum checkout time. I'm not sure if this is feasible or not, but I worry that there's potentially no upper bound on raising the maximum

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 RC0

n, Sep 19, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > > > All, > > > > I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the official > > Apache Aurora 0.16.0 release. > > > > Aurora 0.16.0-rc0 includes the following: > >

[VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 RC0

All, I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the official Apache Aurora 0.16.0 release. Aurora 0.16.0-rc0 includes the following: --- The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEASE-NOTES.md=rel/0.16.0-rc0 The

[VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 RC2

All, I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the official Apache Aurora 0.16.0 release. Aurora 0.16.0-rc2 includes the following: --- The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEASE-NOTES.md=rel/0.16.0-rc2 The

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 RC2

Note: I forgot to mark AURORA-1779 as fixed in 0.16.0 before cutting this RC, so that isn't reflected in the changelog. I don't consider that a blocker to release, but if others disagree I can cut rc3. On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > All, >

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 RC1

gt; On 20/09/16 22:37, "Joshua Cohen" <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > > I'll start with my own +1 vote. > > Verified with the verify-release-candidate script. > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> > wrote: > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 RC2

+0 Missing AURORA-1779 in CHANGELOG +1 Everything checks out via verify-release-candidate Overall +1 (binding). On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > Note: I forgot to mark AURORA-1779 as fixed in 0.16.0 before cutting this > RC, so that isn

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 RC1

I'll start with my own +1 vote. Verified with the verify-release-candidate script. On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > All, > > I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the official > Apache Aurora 0.16.0 release. >

[VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 RC1

All, I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the official Apache Aurora 0.16.0 release. Aurora 0.16.0-rc1 includes the following: --- The RELEASE NOTES for the release are available at: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora.git=RELEASE-NOTES.md=rel/0.16.0-rc1 The

Re: [FEEDBACK] Transitioning Aurora leader election to Apache Curator (`-zk_use_curator`)

I have this enabled in a test cluster and have not noticed any issues with it yet. I'd like to roll it out to production before we drop the old code though. On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Zameer Manji wrote: > Could we change the default and drop the old code at the same

[RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 RC2

All, The vote to accept Apache Aurora 0.16.0 RC2 as the official Apache Aurora 0.16.0 release has passed. +1 (Binding) -- Joshua Cohen Stephan Erb Maxim Khutornenko John Sirois Zameer Manji Jake Farrell +1 (Non-binding) -- Mehrdad

Trouble publishing Aurora 0.16.0 binaries to bintray

Hi all, I'm trying to get a vote out for the 0.16.0 binaries, but I'm running into some issues publishing the binaries. I'm wondering if those who have done this in the past have any advice. The problem seems to boil down to this: when I upload the tarball generated by the release-candidate

Re: Trouble publishing Aurora 0.16.0 binaries to bintray

in some scripting for > this to help automate the process > > -Jake > > > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I'm trying to get a vote out for the 0.16.0 binaries, but I'm running > into > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 packages

I'll start the voting off with my own +1. I verified packages for all three platforms against the test vagrant images from the packaging repo. On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > All, > > > I propose that we accept the following artifac

[VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 packages

All, I propose that we accept the following artifacts as the official deb and rpm packaging for Apache Aurora 0.16.0: *https://dl.bintray.com/jcohen/aurora/ * The Aurora deb and rpm packaging includes the following: --- The branch used to create the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 packages

This vote has succeeded. There were three +1 (binding) votes: Joshua Cohen Stephan Erb John Sirois The official packages are now available here: https://dl.bintray.com/apache/aurora/ Thanks all! On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > Yeah, I've a

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 packages

f?p=aurora-packaging.git;a=tree;hb=refs/heads/0.15.x> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > I'll start the voting off with my own +1. I verified packages for all > three platforms against the test vagrant images from the packaging repo. > > On

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 packages

Yeah, I've also fixed the release candidate script to just generate the email for us (c.f. https://reviews.apache.org/r/53102/) to avoid these problems in the future! On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 3:05 PM, John Sirois <john.sir...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 24, 2016 3:50 PM, "Josh

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 packages

h > installed and worked flawlessly. > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > > > The git url does? This one works for me: > > https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=aurora- > > packaging.git;a=tree;hb=refs/heads/0.16.x >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.16.0 packages

: Apache/2.4.7 (Ubuntu) Vary: Accept-Encoding Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Henry Saputra <henry.sapu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Seems like it returns 404? > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: &

Re: Preparations for 0.17.0

I added https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1782 to 0.17.0 Hopefully I'll have time to look into that soon. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Zameer Manji wrote: > Thanks for stepping up! > > I think picking up Mesos 1.1 is ideal for the release and we should block >

Re: [DRAFT][REPORT]: Apache Aurora - December 2016

+1, thanks for doing this Jake! On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Jake Farrell wrote: > Below is our draft board report which is due next week. Please let me know > if you see any additions or changes that should be made, I'll plan on > submitting this Friday if there are no

Re: Future of storage in Aurora

My understanding of the H2-backed stores is that at least part of the original rationale behind them was that they were meant to be an interim point on the way to external SQL-backed stores which should theoretically provide significant benefits w.r.t. to GC (obviously unproven, especially at

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.18.x packages

+1, everything looks good to me! On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 1:36 AM, Erb, Stephan wrote: > +1 > > The verification scripts for all distributions in the test repository have > passed for me. > > > On 19.07.17, 01:58, "Santhosh Kumar Shanmugham" >

Re: Redesign of the Aurora UI

ws us to delete the vast > majority of our 3rdparty assets that we had to copy into the repo. We can > most likely extend this to remove all of them, including our CSS frameworks > like Bootstrap. > 2) ReactJS was proposed before (by Joshua Cohen) and ironically I was one &g

Re: Redesign of the Aurora UI

dule that > > you could take your own customization. > > > > > > As for the development strategy, I'm in favor of the incremental > approach > > that posts one page at a time. The main benefit is that we are > educating > > the develo

Re: Make drain MAX_STATUS_WAIT configurable

echoing my +1 from Slack here. On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Erb, Stephan wrote: > +1 > > On 05.09.17, 19:17, "David McLaughlin" wrote: > > +1 > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Mauricio Garavaglia < >

Re: Future of storage in Aurora

pler code and operations model due to (b) > > > > e) schema backwards compatibility guarantees due to persistence- > > > > friendly > > > > migration-scripts > > > > f) straightforward normalization to facilitate sharing of > > > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.18.1 RC1

I'm trying to run the verify-release-candidate script, but getting a 404 for the sha512 signature? + download_rc_file apache-aurora-0.18.1-rc1.tar.gz.sha512 + download_dist_file 0.18.1-rc1/apache-aurora-0.18.1-rc1.tar.gz.sha512 + curl -f -O

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Aurora 0.18.1 RC1

t on master should otherwise work against 0.18.1-rc1, but no > guarantees. > > On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@apache.org> wrote: > > > I'm trying to run the verify-release-candidate script, but getting a 404 > > for the sha512 signature? &g