Re: Release Flink 0.10

I would like to remove it as well. I doubt that a lot of people will really switch back to the old one. So we won't gain a lot by keeping it around imo. On Sunday, October 4, 2015, Robert Metzger wrote: > Its not very hard to move the features to the new interface. I think

Re: Release Flink 0.10

Its not very hard to move the features to the new interface. I think the main issue is time ;) For the log file access, somebody has the JIRA assigned, but I don't know when its done. Maybe the missing features make it to the master in time, but I doubt it. There are other issues with the new web

Re: Release Flink 0.10

The new one does not have access to the JobManager log file. Also, the graphs for the TaskManagers are missing. On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Stephan Ewen wrote: > I would actually like to remove the old one, but I am okay with keeping it > and activating the new one by

Re: Release Flink 0.10

I would actually like to remove the old one, but I am okay with keeping it and activating the new one by default On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Robert Metzger wrote: > The list from Kostas also contained the new JobManager front end. > > Do we want to enable it by default

Re: Release Flink 0.10

The list from Kostas also contained the new JobManager front end. Do we want to enable it by default in the 0.10 release? Are we going to keep the old interface, or are we removing it? I'm voting for enabling the new one by default and keeping the old one for the next release. What do you

Re: Release Flink 0.10

+1 makes sense to me too. On 29 September 2015 at 12:25, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > +1, seems to be a very sane thing to do > > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 at 12:20 Till Rohrmann wrote: > > > +1 for 0.10 > > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Stephan Ewen

Re: Release Flink 0.10

+1 here as well On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Fabian Hueske wrote: > +1 for moving directly to 0.10. > > 2015-09-29 11:40 GMT+02:00 Maximilian Michels : > > > Hi Kostas, > > > > I think it makes sense to cancel the proposed 0.10-milestone release. > > We

Re: Release Flink 0.10

Hi Kostas, I think it makes sense to cancel the proposed 0.10-milestone release. We are not far away from completing all essential features of the 0.10 release. After we manage to complete those, we can test and release 0.10. The 0.10 release will be a major step towards the 1.0 release and,

Re: Release Flink 0.10

+1 for 0.10 On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Stephan Ewen wrote: > +1 here as well > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Fabian Hueske wrote: > > > +1 for moving directly to 0.10. > > > > 2015-09-29 11:40 GMT+02:00 Maximilian Michels : > >

Re: Release Flink 0.10

+1, seems to be a very sane thing to do On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 at 12:20 Till Rohrmann wrote: > +1 for 0.10 > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Stephan Ewen wrote: > > > +1 here as well > > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Fabian Hueske

Re: Release Flink 0.10

+1 to the idea. I also think we need to remove Pregel if Gelly wants to graduate. It already deprecated in 0.9. - Henry On Tuesday, September 29, 2015, Kostas Tzoumas wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I would like to propose to cancel the 0.10-milestone release and go > directly

Re: Release Flink 0.10

Oops, I meant Spargel [1] =) [1] https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-master/libs/spargel_guide.html On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 7:59 AM, Henry Saputra wrote: > +1 to the idea. > > I also think we need to remove Pregel if Gelly wants to graduate. It already >