Re: [CANCELED] Pulsar Release 2.0.1-incubating Candidate 1

[Matteo Merli]

Sounds good to me. Does that have any dependencies on changes that are in
master? Can you try to apply on branch-2.0 and see if it applies cleanly
and works well?

Thanks
On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 8:59 PM Masahiro Sakamoto 
wrote:

> If we include that change in 2.0.1, I think we also need to backport this:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/pull/1930
>
> Regards,
>
> Masahiro
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Matteo Merli [mailto:mme...@apache.org]
> > Sent: Friday, June 08, 2018 12:50 PM
> > To: dev@pulsar.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: [CANCELED] Pulsar Release 2.0.1-incubating Candidate 1
> >
> > Masahiro, thanks for catching this. It was my mistake, I forgot to
> backport
> > that change. It is a critical fix, so I think we should include it.
> >
> > Canceling this vote. I'll send a new candidate asap.
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 6:36 PM Masahiro Sakamoto  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Matteo,
> > >
> > > It seems that the following modification has not been backported to
> > > branch-2.0 yet.
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/pull/1893
> > > Is that okay with you?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Masahiro
> > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Matteo Merli [mailto:mme...@apache.org]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2018 2:44 PM
> > > > To: dev@pulsar.incubator.apache.org
> > > > Subject: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.0.1-incubating Candidate 1
> > > >
> > > > This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version
> > > > 2.0.1-incubating.
> > > >
> > > > This is a patch release that fixes few issues identified in previous
> > > release
> > > > 2.0.0-rc1-incubating.
> > > >
> > > > It fixes the following issues:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/milestone/14?closed=1
> > > >
> > > > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will
> > > > stay open for at least 72 hours ***
> > > >
> > > > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided
> > > > for convenience.
> > > >
> > > > Source and binary files:
> > > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/pulsar/pulsar-2.0.1
> > > > -i
> > > > ncubating-candidate-1/
> > > >
> > > > SHA-1 checksums:
> > > >
> > > > ae1bd6f658ebff0745d5eb82961f400f9872f1da
> > > > apache-pulsar-2.0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz
> > > > 2a22e40f290329ae5fac1d33e9754a67e01e882f
> > > > apache-pulsar-2.0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
> > > >
> > > > Maven staging repo:
> > > >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1
> > > > 01
> > > > 9
> > > >
> > > > The tag to be voted upon:
> > > > v2.0.1-incubating-candidate-1
> > > > (b18a2689d592ac676ab70a5447cc023e378eda3b)
> > > >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/releases/tag/v2.0.1-incub
> > > > at
> > > > ing-candidate-1
> > > >
> > > > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/pulsar/KEYS
> > > >
> > > > Please download the the source package, and follow the README to
> > > > build
> > > and
> > > > run the Pulsar standalone service.
> > > > --
> > > > Matteo Merli
> > > > 
> > >
> > --
> > Matteo Merli
> > 
>
-- 
Matteo Merli

RE: [CANCELED] Pulsar Release 2.0.1-incubating Candidate 1

[Masahiro Sakamoto]

If we include that change in 2.0.1, I think we also need to backport this:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/pull/1930

Regards,

Masahiro

> -Original Message-
> From: Matteo Merli [mailto:mme...@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, June 08, 2018 12:50 PM
> To: dev@pulsar.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [CANCELED] Pulsar Release 2.0.1-incubating Candidate 1
> 
> Masahiro, thanks for catching this. It was my mistake, I forgot to backport
> that change. It is a critical fix, so I think we should include it.
> 
> Canceling this vote. I'll send a new candidate asap.
> 
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 6:36 PM Masahiro Sakamoto 
> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Matteo,
> >
> > It seems that the following modification has not been backported to
> > branch-2.0 yet.
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/pull/1893
> > Is that okay with you?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Masahiro
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Matteo Merli [mailto:mme...@apache.org]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2018 2:44 PM
> > > To: dev@pulsar.incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.0.1-incubating Candidate 1
> > >
> > > This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version
> > > 2.0.1-incubating.
> > >
> > > This is a patch release that fixes few issues identified in previous
> > release
> > > 2.0.0-rc1-incubating.
> > >
> > > It fixes the following issues:
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/milestone/14?closed=1
> > >
> > > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will
> > > stay open for at least 72 hours ***
> > >
> > > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided
> > > for convenience.
> > >
> > > Source and binary files:
> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/pulsar/pulsar-2.0.1
> > > -i
> > > ncubating-candidate-1/
> > >
> > > SHA-1 checksums:
> > >
> > > ae1bd6f658ebff0745d5eb82961f400f9872f1da
> > > apache-pulsar-2.0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz
> > > 2a22e40f290329ae5fac1d33e9754a67e01e882f
> > > apache-pulsar-2.0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
> > >
> > > Maven staging repo:
> > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1
> > > 01
> > > 9
> > >
> > > The tag to be voted upon:
> > > v2.0.1-incubating-candidate-1
> > > (b18a2689d592ac676ab70a5447cc023e378eda3b)
> > >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/releases/tag/v2.0.1-incub
> > > at
> > > ing-candidate-1
> > >
> > > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/pulsar/KEYS
> > >
> > > Please download the the source package, and follow the README to
> > > build
> > and
> > > run the Pulsar standalone service.
> > > --
> > > Matteo Merli
> > > 
> >
> --
> Matteo Merli
> 

[CANCELED] Pulsar Release 2.0.1-incubating Candidate 1

[Matteo Merli]

Masahiro, thanks for catching this. It was my mistake, I forgot to backport
that change. It is a critical fix, so I think we should include it.

Canceling this vote. I'll send a new candidate asap.

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 6:36 PM Masahiro Sakamoto 
wrote:

> Hi Matteo,
>
> It seems that the following modification has not been backported to
> branch-2.0 yet.
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/pull/1893
> Is that okay with you?
>
> Regards,
>
> Masahiro
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Matteo Merli [mailto:mme...@apache.org]
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2018 2:44 PM
> > To: dev@pulsar.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.0.1-incubating Candidate 1
> >
> > This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version
> > 2.0.1-incubating.
> >
> > This is a patch release that fixes few issues identified in previous
> release
> > 2.0.0-rc1-incubating.
> >
> > It fixes the following issues:
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/milestone/14?closed=1
> >
> > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay
> > open for at least 72 hours ***
> >
> > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for
> > convenience.
> >
> > Source and binary files:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/pulsar/pulsar-2.0.1-i
> > ncubating-candidate-1/
> >
> > SHA-1 checksums:
> >
> > ae1bd6f658ebff0745d5eb82961f400f9872f1da
> > apache-pulsar-2.0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz
> > 2a22e40f290329ae5fac1d33e9754a67e01e882f
> > apache-pulsar-2.0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
> >
> > Maven staging repo:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-101
> > 9
> >
> > The tag to be voted upon:
> > v2.0.1-incubating-candidate-1
> > (b18a2689d592ac676ab70a5447cc023e378eda3b)
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/releases/tag/v2.0.1-incubat
> > ing-candidate-1
> >
> > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/pulsar/KEYS
> >
> > Please download the the source package, and follow the README to build
> and
> > run the Pulsar standalone service.
> > --
> > Matteo Merli
> > 
>
-- 
Matteo Merli

Re: [DISCUSSION] Podling name search

[Sijie Guo]

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 6:48 PM Jerry Peng 
wrote:

> I completely agree with want Matteo said.  Changing the name will
> effectively kill the project.   Changing the project will probably also
> implying changing the package names in the code itself which will be a
> breaking and non-backwards compatible change.  Any reasonable developer
> will be turned off by this.
>




>
> To be honest, considering something that might happen in 4 years is
> analogous to preventing a plane from taking off because someone might chock
> on peanuts during the flight.  Lets first get the plane to take off.
>

I like this, strongly +1. #shipit




>
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 6:39 PM Sijie Guo  wrote:
>
> > +1 for using the name "Apache Pulsar".
> >
> > - Sijie
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 5:01 PM Matteo Merli  wrote:
> >
> > > As some in Pulsar community are already aware, one of the pending
> > > tasks for Pulsar project to complete the "name search task".
> > >
> > > A JIRA task was opened to collect facts around usages of Pulsar
> > > name: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-141
> > >
> > > I had forwarded that to trademarks@ and this was the response
> > > from Mark Thomas.
> > >
> > > > Pulsar is a very popular name for software.
> > > >
> > > > I don't see any obvious conflicts but given the popularity of the
> name
> > > > it is likely, in a global marketplace, that there will be some.
> > > >
> > > > Should the project wish to register the "PULSAR" mark in the future,
> it
> > > > is uncertain whether the ASF would be able to. Registering "APACHE
> > > > PULSAR" is unlikely to hit any difficulties.
> > > >
> > > > It is more likely than usual that an infringement will emerge in the
> > > > future that would require the project to rename.
> > > >
> > > > The podling needs to make a choice. Either:
> > > >
> > > > a) continue using PULSAR and accept that:
> > > >- there are likely to be some restrictions on how the name is used
> > > >  (primarily that it always has to be APACHE PULSAR)
> > > >- it is more likely than for most ASF projects that the project
> > > >  will be required to rename due to an infringement
> > > >
> > > > or
> > > >
> > > > b) pick a new name
> > > >
> > > > No rush on this. The podling should take time to discuss this.
> > >
> > >
> > > Therefore we need to take a decision on this matter.
> > >
> > > My personal inclination is to continue to use "Apache Pulsar" and
> > > have that to be registered as a trademark of ASF.
> > >
> > > My reasoning:
> > >
> > >  * We are anyway already always referring to "Apache Pulsar"
> > >rather than just "Pulsar"
> > >
> > >  * Changing name at this point in life of the project would be
> > >very disruptive. We just spent the past year into building
> > >some naming awareness and it would all vanish, not to mention
> > >the huge amount of work in updating documentation, package
> > >names, etc.
> > >
> > >  * If a conflict arise later on, it might be easier to change
> > >name at that point. Once the project has a larger community
> > >and bigger recognition, changing name would not mean to
> > >restart from scratch.
> > >
> > >
> > > I propose to have anyone share they thoughs on this issue. Once
> > > there is a prevalent inclination in the community, we can vote a
> > > final resolution on the subject.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Matteo
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matteo Merli
> > > 
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Podling name search

[Jerry Peng]

I completely agree with want Matteo said.  Changing the name will
effectively kill the project.   Changing the project will probably also
implying changing the package names in the code itself which will be a
breaking and non-backwards compatible change.  Any reasonable developer
will be turned off by this.

To be honest, considering something that might happen in 4 years is
analogous to preventing a plane from taking off because someone might chock
on peanuts during the flight.  Lets first get the plane to take off.

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 6:39 PM Sijie Guo  wrote:

> +1 for using the name "Apache Pulsar".
>
> - Sijie
>
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 5:01 PM Matteo Merli  wrote:
>
> > As some in Pulsar community are already aware, one of the pending
> > tasks for Pulsar project to complete the "name search task".
> >
> > A JIRA task was opened to collect facts around usages of Pulsar
> > name: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-141
> >
> > I had forwarded that to trademarks@ and this was the response
> > from Mark Thomas.
> >
> > > Pulsar is a very popular name for software.
> > >
> > > I don't see any obvious conflicts but given the popularity of the name
> > > it is likely, in a global marketplace, that there will be some.
> > >
> > > Should the project wish to register the "PULSAR" mark in the future, it
> > > is uncertain whether the ASF would be able to. Registering "APACHE
> > > PULSAR" is unlikely to hit any difficulties.
> > >
> > > It is more likely than usual that an infringement will emerge in the
> > > future that would require the project to rename.
> > >
> > > The podling needs to make a choice. Either:
> > >
> > > a) continue using PULSAR and accept that:
> > >- there are likely to be some restrictions on how the name is used
> > >  (primarily that it always has to be APACHE PULSAR)
> > >- it is more likely than for most ASF projects that the project
> > >  will be required to rename due to an infringement
> > >
> > > or
> > >
> > > b) pick a new name
> > >
> > > No rush on this. The podling should take time to discuss this.
> >
> >
> > Therefore we need to take a decision on this matter.
> >
> > My personal inclination is to continue to use "Apache Pulsar" and
> > have that to be registered as a trademark of ASF.
> >
> > My reasoning:
> >
> >  * We are anyway already always referring to "Apache Pulsar"
> >rather than just "Pulsar"
> >
> >  * Changing name at this point in life of the project would be
> >very disruptive. We just spent the past year into building
> >some naming awareness and it would all vanish, not to mention
> >the huge amount of work in updating documentation, package
> >names, etc.
> >
> >  * If a conflict arise later on, it might be easier to change
> >name at that point. Once the project has a larger community
> >and bigger recognition, changing name would not mean to
> >restart from scratch.
> >
> >
> > I propose to have anyone share they thoughs on this issue. Once
> > there is a prevalent inclination in the community, we can vote a
> > final resolution on the subject.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Matteo
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matteo Merli
> > 
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Podling name search

[Sijie Guo]

+1 for using the name "Apache Pulsar".

- Sijie

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 5:01 PM Matteo Merli  wrote:

> As some in Pulsar community are already aware, one of the pending
> tasks for Pulsar project to complete the "name search task".
>
> A JIRA task was opened to collect facts around usages of Pulsar
> name: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-141
>
> I had forwarded that to trademarks@ and this was the response
> from Mark Thomas.
>
> > Pulsar is a very popular name for software.
> >
> > I don't see any obvious conflicts but given the popularity of the name
> > it is likely, in a global marketplace, that there will be some.
> >
> > Should the project wish to register the "PULSAR" mark in the future, it
> > is uncertain whether the ASF would be able to. Registering "APACHE
> > PULSAR" is unlikely to hit any difficulties.
> >
> > It is more likely than usual that an infringement will emerge in the
> > future that would require the project to rename.
> >
> > The podling needs to make a choice. Either:
> >
> > a) continue using PULSAR and accept that:
> >- there are likely to be some restrictions on how the name is used
> >  (primarily that it always has to be APACHE PULSAR)
> >- it is more likely than for most ASF projects that the project
> >  will be required to rename due to an infringement
> >
> > or
> >
> > b) pick a new name
> >
> > No rush on this. The podling should take time to discuss this.
>
>
> Therefore we need to take a decision on this matter.
>
> My personal inclination is to continue to use "Apache Pulsar" and
> have that to be registered as a trademark of ASF.
>
> My reasoning:
>
>  * We are anyway already always referring to "Apache Pulsar"
>rather than just "Pulsar"
>
>  * Changing name at this point in life of the project would be
>very disruptive. We just spent the past year into building
>some naming awareness and it would all vanish, not to mention
>the huge amount of work in updating documentation, package
>names, etc.
>
>  * If a conflict arise later on, it might be easier to change
>name at that point. Once the project has a larger community
>and bigger recognition, changing name would not mean to
>restart from scratch.
>
>
> I propose to have anyone share they thoughs on this issue. Once
> there is a prevalent inclination in the community, we can vote a
> final resolution on the subject.
>
> Thanks,
> Matteo
>
>
>
> --
> Matteo Merli
> 
>

RE: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.0.1-incubating Candidate 1

[Masahiro Sakamoto]

Hi Matteo,

It seems that the following modification has not been backported to branch-2.0 
yet.
https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/pull/1893
Is that okay with you?

Regards,

Masahiro

> -Original Message-
> From: Matteo Merli [mailto:mme...@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2018 2:44 PM
> To: dev@pulsar.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.0.1-incubating Candidate 1
> 
> This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version
> 2.0.1-incubating.
> 
> This is a patch release that fixes few issues identified in previous release
> 2.0.0-rc1-incubating.
> 
> It fixes the following issues:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/milestone/14?closed=1
> 
> *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay
> open for at least 72 hours ***
> 
> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for
> convenience.
> 
> Source and binary files:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/pulsar/pulsar-2.0.1-i
> ncubating-candidate-1/
> 
> SHA-1 checksums:
> 
> ae1bd6f658ebff0745d5eb82961f400f9872f1da
> apache-pulsar-2.0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz
> 2a22e40f290329ae5fac1d33e9754a67e01e882f
> apache-pulsar-2.0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
> 
> Maven staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-101
> 9
> 
> The tag to be voted upon:
> v2.0.1-incubating-candidate-1
> (b18a2689d592ac676ab70a5447cc023e378eda3b)
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/releases/tag/v2.0.1-incubat
> ing-candidate-1
> 
> Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/pulsar/KEYS
> 
> Please download the the source package, and follow the README to build and
> run the Pulsar standalone service.
> --
> Matteo Merli
> 

Re: [DISCUSSION] Podling name search

[Matteo Merli]

I also wanted to note that Yahoo legal and OSS department did conduct a
rigorous validation process for the name, before open sourcing "Yahoo
Pulsar" in Sept 2016.

Of course that won't guarantee anything, but the name wasn't decided
without putting some thought on it.

Matteo


On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 6:19 PM Matteo Merli  wrote:

> In my view, even if there were a 100% chance to be forced to change name
> in 4 years, it would still make sense to change it then, rather than now.
>
> Changing it now, would mean to effectively kill the project, under any
> plausible scenarios.
>
> Matteo
>
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 5:52 PM P. Taylor Goetz  wrote:
>
>> I’d suggest thinking long and hard about this. Would you rather deal with
>> a name change now, or 4 years from now as a TLP?
>>
>> It may sound like a remote possibility, but trust me, these things can
>> and do happen.
>>
>> -Taylor
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jun 7, 2018, at 8:01 PM, Matteo Merli  wrote:
>> >
>> > As some in Pulsar community are already aware, one of the pending
>> > tasks for Pulsar project to complete the "name search task".
>> >
>> > A JIRA task was opened to collect facts around usages of Pulsar
>> > name: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-141
>> >
>> > I had forwarded that to trademarks@ and this was the response
>> > from Mark Thomas.
>> >
>> >> Pulsar is a very popular name for software.
>> >>
>> >> I don't see any obvious conflicts but given the popularity of the name
>> >> it is likely, in a global marketplace, that there will be some.
>> >>
>> >> Should the project wish to register the "PULSAR" mark in the future, it
>> >> is uncertain whether the ASF would be able to. Registering "APACHE
>> >> PULSAR" is unlikely to hit any difficulties.
>> >>
>> >> It is more likely than usual that an infringement will emerge in the
>> >> future that would require the project to rename.
>> >>
>> >> The podling needs to make a choice. Either:
>> >>
>> >> a) continue using PULSAR and accept that:
>> >>   - there are likely to be some restrictions on how the name is used
>> >> (primarily that it always has to be APACHE PULSAR)
>> >>   - it is more likely than for most ASF projects that the project
>> >> will be required to rename due to an infringement
>> >>
>> >> or
>> >>
>> >> b) pick a new name
>> >>
>> >> No rush on this. The podling should take time to discuss this.
>> >
>> >
>> > Therefore we need to take a decision on this matter.
>> >
>> > My personal inclination is to continue to use "Apache Pulsar" and
>> > have that to be registered as a trademark of ASF.
>> >
>> > My reasoning:
>> >
>> > * We are anyway already always referring to "Apache Pulsar"
>> >   rather than just "Pulsar"
>> >
>> > * Changing name at this point in life of the project would be
>> >   very disruptive. We just spent the past year into building
>> >   some naming awareness and it would all vanish, not to mention
>> >   the huge amount of work in updating documentation, package
>> >   names, etc.
>> >
>> > * If a conflict arise later on, it might be easier to change
>> >   name at that point. Once the project has a larger community
>> >   and bigger recognition, changing name would not mean to
>> >   restart from scratch.
>> >
>> >
>> > I propose to have anyone share they thoughs on this issue. Once
>> > there is a prevalent inclination in the community, we can vote a
>> > final resolution on the subject.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Matteo
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Matteo Merli
>> > 
>>
> --
> Matteo Merli
> 
>
-- 
Matteo Merli

Re: [DISCUSSION] Podling name search

[Matteo Merli]

In my view, even if there were a 100% chance to be forced to change name in
4 years, it would still make sense to change it then, rather than now.

Changing it now, would mean to effectively kill the project, under any
plausible scenarios.

Matteo

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 5:52 PM P. Taylor Goetz  wrote:

> I’d suggest thinking long and hard about this. Would you rather deal with
> a name change now, or 4 years from now as a TLP?
>
> It may sound like a remote possibility, but trust me, these things can and
> do happen.
>
> -Taylor
>
>
>
> > On Jun 7, 2018, at 8:01 PM, Matteo Merli  wrote:
> >
> > As some in Pulsar community are already aware, one of the pending
> > tasks for Pulsar project to complete the "name search task".
> >
> > A JIRA task was opened to collect facts around usages of Pulsar
> > name: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-141
> >
> > I had forwarded that to trademarks@ and this was the response
> > from Mark Thomas.
> >
> >> Pulsar is a very popular name for software.
> >>
> >> I don't see any obvious conflicts but given the popularity of the name
> >> it is likely, in a global marketplace, that there will be some.
> >>
> >> Should the project wish to register the "PULSAR" mark in the future, it
> >> is uncertain whether the ASF would be able to. Registering "APACHE
> >> PULSAR" is unlikely to hit any difficulties.
> >>
> >> It is more likely than usual that an infringement will emerge in the
> >> future that would require the project to rename.
> >>
> >> The podling needs to make a choice. Either:
> >>
> >> a) continue using PULSAR and accept that:
> >>   - there are likely to be some restrictions on how the name is used
> >> (primarily that it always has to be APACHE PULSAR)
> >>   - it is more likely than for most ASF projects that the project
> >> will be required to rename due to an infringement
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >> b) pick a new name
> >>
> >> No rush on this. The podling should take time to discuss this.
> >
> >
> > Therefore we need to take a decision on this matter.
> >
> > My personal inclination is to continue to use "Apache Pulsar" and
> > have that to be registered as a trademark of ASF.
> >
> > My reasoning:
> >
> > * We are anyway already always referring to "Apache Pulsar"
> >   rather than just "Pulsar"
> >
> > * Changing name at this point in life of the project would be
> >   very disruptive. We just spent the past year into building
> >   some naming awareness and it would all vanish, not to mention
> >   the huge amount of work in updating documentation, package
> >   names, etc.
> >
> > * If a conflict arise later on, it might be easier to change
> >   name at that point. Once the project has a larger community
> >   and bigger recognition, changing name would not mean to
> >   restart from scratch.
> >
> >
> > I propose to have anyone share they thoughs on this issue. Once
> > there is a prevalent inclination in the community, we can vote a
> > final resolution on the subject.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Matteo
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matteo Merli
> > 
>
-- 
Matteo Merli

Re: [DISCUSSION] Podling name search

[P. Taylor Goetz]

I’d suggest thinking long and hard about this. Would you rather deal with a 
name change now, or 4 years from now as a TLP?

It may sound like a remote possibility, but trust me, these things can and do 
happen.

-Taylor



> On Jun 7, 2018, at 8:01 PM, Matteo Merli  wrote:
> 
> As some in Pulsar community are already aware, one of the pending
> tasks for Pulsar project to complete the "name search task".
> 
> A JIRA task was opened to collect facts around usages of Pulsar
> name: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-141
> 
> I had forwarded that to trademarks@ and this was the response
> from Mark Thomas.
> 
>> Pulsar is a very popular name for software.
>> 
>> I don't see any obvious conflicts but given the popularity of the name
>> it is likely, in a global marketplace, that there will be some.
>> 
>> Should the project wish to register the "PULSAR" mark in the future, it
>> is uncertain whether the ASF would be able to. Registering "APACHE
>> PULSAR" is unlikely to hit any difficulties.
>> 
>> It is more likely than usual that an infringement will emerge in the
>> future that would require the project to rename.
>> 
>> The podling needs to make a choice. Either:
>> 
>> a) continue using PULSAR and accept that:
>>   - there are likely to be some restrictions on how the name is used
>> (primarily that it always has to be APACHE PULSAR)
>>   - it is more likely than for most ASF projects that the project
>> will be required to rename due to an infringement
>> 
>> or
>> 
>> b) pick a new name
>> 
>> No rush on this. The podling should take time to discuss this.
> 
> 
> Therefore we need to take a decision on this matter.
> 
> My personal inclination is to continue to use "Apache Pulsar" and
> have that to be registered as a trademark of ASF.
> 
> My reasoning:
> 
> * We are anyway already always referring to "Apache Pulsar"
>   rather than just "Pulsar"
> 
> * Changing name at this point in life of the project would be
>   very disruptive. We just spent the past year into building
>   some naming awareness and it would all vanish, not to mention
>   the huge amount of work in updating documentation, package
>   names, etc.
> 
> * If a conflict arise later on, it might be easier to change
>   name at that point. Once the project has a larger community
>   and bigger recognition, changing name would not mean to
>   restart from scratch.
> 
> 
> I propose to have anyone share they thoughs on this issue. Once
> there is a prevalent inclination in the community, we can vote a
> final resolution on the subject.
> 
> Thanks,
> Matteo
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Matteo Merli
> 

Re: [DISCUSSION] Podling name search

[Jia Zhai]

+1 for continuing to use the name “Apache Pulsar”.



On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 8:03 AM, Sanjeev Kulkarni 
wrote:

> +1 for continuing to use the name “Apache Pulsar”.
>
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 5:01 PM Matteo Merli  wrote:
>
> > As some in Pulsar community are already aware, one of the pending
> > tasks for Pulsar project to complete the "name search task".
> >
> > A JIRA task was opened to collect facts around usages of Pulsar
> > name: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-141
> >
> > I had forwarded that to trademarks@ and this was the response
> > from Mark Thomas.
> >
> > > Pulsar is a very popular name for software.
> > >
> > > I don't see any obvious conflicts but given the popularity of the name
> > > it is likely, in a global marketplace, that there will be some.
> > >
> > > Should the project wish to register the "PULSAR" mark in the future, it
> > > is uncertain whether the ASF would be able to. Registering "APACHE
> > > PULSAR" is unlikely to hit any difficulties.
> > >
> > > It is more likely than usual that an infringement will emerge in the
> > > future that would require the project to rename.
> > >
> > > The podling needs to make a choice. Either:
> > >
> > > a) continue using PULSAR and accept that:
> > >- there are likely to be some restrictions on how the name is used
> > >  (primarily that it always has to be APACHE PULSAR)
> > >- it is more likely than for most ASF projects that the project
> > >  will be required to rename due to an infringement
> > >
> > > or
> > >
> > > b) pick a new name
> > >
> > > No rush on this. The podling should take time to discuss this.
> >
> >
> > Therefore we need to take a decision on this matter.
> >
> > My personal inclination is to continue to use "Apache Pulsar" and
> > have that to be registered as a trademark of ASF.
> >
> > My reasoning:
> >
> >  * We are anyway already always referring to "Apache Pulsar"
> >rather than just "Pulsar"
> >
> >  * Changing name at this point in life of the project would be
> >very disruptive. We just spent the past year into building
> >some naming awareness and it would all vanish, not to mention
> >the huge amount of work in updating documentation, package
> >names, etc.
> >
> >  * If a conflict arise later on, it might be easier to change
> >name at that point. Once the project has a larger community
> >and bigger recognition, changing name would not mean to
> >restart from scratch.
> >
> >
> > I propose to have anyone share they thoughs on this issue. Once
> > there is a prevalent inclination in the community, we can vote a
> > final resolution on the subject.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Matteo
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matteo Merli
> > 
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Podling name search

[Sanjeev Kulkarni]

+1 for continuing to use the name “Apache Pulsar”.

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 5:01 PM Matteo Merli  wrote:

> As some in Pulsar community are already aware, one of the pending
> tasks for Pulsar project to complete the "name search task".
>
> A JIRA task was opened to collect facts around usages of Pulsar
> name: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-141
>
> I had forwarded that to trademarks@ and this was the response
> from Mark Thomas.
>
> > Pulsar is a very popular name for software.
> >
> > I don't see any obvious conflicts but given the popularity of the name
> > it is likely, in a global marketplace, that there will be some.
> >
> > Should the project wish to register the "PULSAR" mark in the future, it
> > is uncertain whether the ASF would be able to. Registering "APACHE
> > PULSAR" is unlikely to hit any difficulties.
> >
> > It is more likely than usual that an infringement will emerge in the
> > future that would require the project to rename.
> >
> > The podling needs to make a choice. Either:
> >
> > a) continue using PULSAR and accept that:
> >- there are likely to be some restrictions on how the name is used
> >  (primarily that it always has to be APACHE PULSAR)
> >- it is more likely than for most ASF projects that the project
> >  will be required to rename due to an infringement
> >
> > or
> >
> > b) pick a new name
> >
> > No rush on this. The podling should take time to discuss this.
>
>
> Therefore we need to take a decision on this matter.
>
> My personal inclination is to continue to use "Apache Pulsar" and
> have that to be registered as a trademark of ASF.
>
> My reasoning:
>
>  * We are anyway already always referring to "Apache Pulsar"
>rather than just "Pulsar"
>
>  * Changing name at this point in life of the project would be
>very disruptive. We just spent the past year into building
>some naming awareness and it would all vanish, not to mention
>the huge amount of work in updating documentation, package
>names, etc.
>
>  * If a conflict arise later on, it might be easier to change
>name at that point. Once the project has a larger community
>and bigger recognition, changing name would not mean to
>restart from scratch.
>
>
> I propose to have anyone share they thoughs on this issue. Once
> there is a prevalent inclination in the community, we can vote a
> final resolution on the subject.
>
> Thanks,
> Matteo
>
>
>
> --
> Matteo Merli
> 
>

[DISCUSSION] Podling name search

[Matteo Merli]

As some in Pulsar community are already aware, one of the pending
tasks for Pulsar project to complete the "name search task".

A JIRA task was opened to collect facts around usages of Pulsar
name: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-141

I had forwarded that to trademarks@ and this was the response
from Mark Thomas.

> Pulsar is a very popular name for software.
>
> I don't see any obvious conflicts but given the popularity of the name
> it is likely, in a global marketplace, that there will be some.
>
> Should the project wish to register the "PULSAR" mark in the future, it
> is uncertain whether the ASF would be able to. Registering "APACHE
> PULSAR" is unlikely to hit any difficulties.
>
> It is more likely than usual that an infringement will emerge in the
> future that would require the project to rename.
>
> The podling needs to make a choice. Either:
>
> a) continue using PULSAR and accept that:
>- there are likely to be some restrictions on how the name is used
>  (primarily that it always has to be APACHE PULSAR)
>- it is more likely than for most ASF projects that the project
>  will be required to rename due to an infringement
>
> or
>
> b) pick a new name
>
> No rush on this. The podling should take time to discuss this.


Therefore we need to take a decision on this matter.

My personal inclination is to continue to use "Apache Pulsar" and
have that to be registered as a trademark of ASF.

My reasoning:

 * We are anyway already always referring to "Apache Pulsar"
   rather than just "Pulsar"

 * Changing name at this point in life of the project would be
   very disruptive. We just spent the past year into building
   some naming awareness and it would all vanish, not to mention
   the huge amount of work in updating documentation, package
   names, etc.

 * If a conflict arise later on, it might be easier to change
   name at that point. Once the project has a larger community
   and bigger recognition, changing name would not mean to
   restart from scratch.


I propose to have anyone share they thoughs on this issue. Once
there is a prevalent inclination in the community, we can vote a
final resolution on the subject.

Thanks,
Matteo



-- 
Matteo Merli

Re: Pulsar meetup in June/July

[Sijie Guo]

+1 go pulsar!

- Sijie

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 4:49 PM Sanjeev Kulkarni  wrote:

> July 10th works for me as well!
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 11:21 AM Joe F  wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > I got the availability for the venue in the 2nd week of July  (50
> people),
> > and its available on  July 9th, 10th, or 13th .  How does that sound?  I
> > need to reserve a firm date...
> >
> > My preference is for 10th  [since its not a Monday or Friday :-) ] but
> I'm
> > fine with a whatever is convenient for all ..
> >
> >
> > Joe
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 7:21 PM, Sijie Guo  wrote:
> >
> > > Any updates?
> > >
> > > - Sijie
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 7:29 PM, Joe F  wrote:
> > >
> > > > I would expect people to volunteer and sign up... that's why I said
> > > "from
> > > > Pulsar users and developers".
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Joe
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 6:44 PM, Dave Fisher 
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi -
> > > > >
> > > > > What would be the agenda?
> > > > >
> > > > > How can this event be promoted to help grow the community?
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Dave
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Apr 30, 2018, at 11:29 AM, Joe F 
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In June, it going to be a year since Pulsar was accepted into the
> > > > > incubator.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm thinking of a meetup, with a few in-depth
> talks/presentations,
> > > > what's
> > > > > > new in Pulsar 2.0 etc,   from Pulsar users and developers.  Are
> > > people
> > > > > > interested in a 1/2day event?   I can arrange for the venue and
> > > > > logistics.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Joe
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Pulsar meetup in June/July

[Sanjeev Kulkarni]

July 10th works for me as well!

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 11:21 AM Joe F  wrote:

> All,
>
> I got the availability for the venue in the 2nd week of July  (50 people),
> and its available on  July 9th, 10th, or 13th .  How does that sound?  I
> need to reserve a firm date...
>
> My preference is for 10th  [since its not a Monday or Friday :-) ] but I'm
> fine with a whatever is convenient for all ..
>
>
> Joe
>
> On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 7:21 PM, Sijie Guo  wrote:
>
> > Any updates?
> >
> > - Sijie
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 7:29 PM, Joe F  wrote:
> >
> > > I would expect people to volunteer and sign up... that's why I said
> > "from
> > > Pulsar users and developers".
> > >
> > >
> > > Joe
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 6:44 PM, Dave Fisher 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi -
> > > >
> > > > What would be the agenda?
> > > >
> > > > How can this event be promoted to help grow the community?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Dave
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > >
> > > > > On Apr 30, 2018, at 11:29 AM, Joe F  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > In June, it going to be a year since Pulsar was accepted into the
> > > > incubator.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm thinking of a meetup, with a few in-depth talks/presentations,
> > > what's
> > > > > new in Pulsar 2.0 etc,   from Pulsar users and developers.  Are
> > people
> > > > > interested in a 1/2day event?   I can arrange for the venue and
> > > > logistics.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Joe
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Pulsar meetup in June/July

[Sahaya Andrews]

+1 from me as well.

Andrews.

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 4:36 PM, Matteo Merli  wrote:
> Joe, July 10th sounds good to me.
>
> Thank you for organizing. Hopefully many people from Pulsar community can
> attend.
>
> Matteo
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 11:21 AM Joe F  wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> I got the availability for the venue in the 2nd week of July  (50 people),
>> and its available on  July 9th, 10th, or 13th .  How does that sound?  I
>> need to reserve a firm date...
>>
>> My preference is for 10th  [since its not a Monday or Friday :-) ] but I'm
>> fine with a whatever is convenient for all ..
>>
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 7:21 PM, Sijie Guo  wrote:
>>
>> > Any updates?
>> >
>> > - Sijie
>> >
>> > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 7:29 PM, Joe F  wrote:
>> >
>> > > I would expect people to volunteer and sign up... that's why I said
>> > "from
>> > > Pulsar users and developers".
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Joe
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 6:44 PM, Dave Fisher 
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hi -
>> > > >
>> > > > What would be the agenda?
>> > > >
>> > > > How can this event be promoted to help grow the community?
>> > > >
>> > > > Regards,
>> > > > Dave
>> > > >
>> > > > Sent from my iPhone
>> > > >
>> > > > > On Apr 30, 2018, at 11:29 AM, Joe F  wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > In June, it going to be a year since Pulsar was accepted into the
>> > > > incubator.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I'm thinking of a meetup, with a few in-depth talks/presentations,
>> > > what's
>> > > > > new in Pulsar 2.0 etc,   from Pulsar users and developers.  Are
>> > people
>> > > > > interested in a 1/2day event?   I can arrange for the venue and
>> > > > logistics.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Joe
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
> --
> Matteo Merli
> 

Re: Pulsar meetup in June/July

[Matteo Merli]

Joe, July 10th sounds good to me.

Thank you for organizing. Hopefully many people from Pulsar community can
attend.

Matteo

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 11:21 AM Joe F  wrote:

> All,
>
> I got the availability for the venue in the 2nd week of July  (50 people),
> and its available on  July 9th, 10th, or 13th .  How does that sound?  I
> need to reserve a firm date...
>
> My preference is for 10th  [since its not a Monday or Friday :-) ] but I'm
> fine with a whatever is convenient for all ..
>
>
> Joe
>
> On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 7:21 PM, Sijie Guo  wrote:
>
> > Any updates?
> >
> > - Sijie
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 7:29 PM, Joe F  wrote:
> >
> > > I would expect people to volunteer and sign up... that's why I said
> > "from
> > > Pulsar users and developers".
> > >
> > >
> > > Joe
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 6:44 PM, Dave Fisher 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi -
> > > >
> > > > What would be the agenda?
> > > >
> > > > How can this event be promoted to help grow the community?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Dave
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > >
> > > > > On Apr 30, 2018, at 11:29 AM, Joe F  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > In June, it going to be a year since Pulsar was accepted into the
> > > > incubator.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm thinking of a meetup, with a few in-depth talks/presentations,
> > > what's
> > > > > new in Pulsar 2.0 etc,   from Pulsar users and developers.  Are
> > people
> > > > > interested in a 1/2day event?   I can arrange for the venue and
> > > > logistics.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Joe
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
-- 
Matteo Merli

Re: [DRAFT] Pulsar Podling report June 2018

[Matteo Merli]

Sure, me or whoever will volunteer for drafting the report will include
that.

Matteo

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 7:12 AM P. Taylor Goetz  wrote:

> Okay. Then please plan to include a discussion of progress made with
> respect to brand management in your polling report for September.
>
> -Taylor
>
> > On Jun 7, 2018, at 1:03 AM, Matteo Merli  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Taylor,
> >
> > The draft was obviously written before the issues were raised on the
> > private list. I have already replied on the private@ list on the
> specific
> > and we'll continue to follow up there. I believe a reply in the report
> > without the context of the questions would not be very helpful.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Matteo
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 9:26 PM P. Taylor Goetz  > wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks for sharing the report draft with dev@. It looks pretty good.
> >>
> >> As a mentor, I’d like to see some mention of how the pulsar PPMC plans
> to
> >> address the branding issues raised on private@. I feel pulsar is doing
> >> very well in terms of releases, etc., but falling painfully short in
> terms
> >> of adhering to branding guidelines [1][2].
> >>
> >> -Taylor
> >>
> >> [1] https://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html <
> https://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html> <
> >> https://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html <
> https://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html>>
> >> [2] https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs <
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs> <
> >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Jun 6, 2018, at 11:57 AM, Matteo Merli  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Here is the draft for the podling report. Please submit feedback soon,
> >> the
> >>> deadline is today (sorry for sending draft at last moment).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>> Pulsar is a highly scalable, low latency messaging platform running on
> >>> commodity hardware. It provides simple pub-sub semantics over topics,
> >>> guaranteed at-least-once delivery of messages, automatic cursor
> >> management
> >>> for
> >>> subscribers, and cross-datacenter replication.
> >>>
> >>> Pulsar has been incubating since 2017-06-01.
> >>>
> >>> Most important issues to address in the move towards graduation:
> >>>
> >>> 1. Complete the Podling name search tasks. The task is in progress
> right
> >>> now.
> >>>
> >>> Any issues that the Incubator PMC (IPMC) or ASF Board wish/need to be
> >> aware
> >>> of?
> >>>
> >>> None
> >>>
> >>> How has the community developed since the last report?
> >>>
> >>> The community added 7 new contributors that submitted pull-requests
> >> which
> >>> were merged into master.
> >>>
> >>> The number of users approaching the team on the Slack channel has kept
> >>> steadily increasing since the last report. Many users have actively
> >>> deployed
> >>> Pulsar for evaluation and production use cases.
> >>>
> >>> Project members from several companies have organized or participated
> in
> >>> several meetups, presenting Pulsar's introductions, deep-dives and
> >>> hands-on
> >>> tutorial, including recorded podcasts. We have several scheduled talks
> >> on
> >>> Pulsar at various conferences, 2 at ApacheCon in September, one at
> OSCon
> >>> in
> >>> July and 2 others at Strata New York in September. A Pulsar dedicated
> >>> meetup
> >>> is being organized for next July.
> >>>
> >>> Since the last report the number of weekly-active-users on the Slack
> >>> channel
> >>> has increased from 53 to 88.
> >>>
> >>> We have reached the 1 year mark since Pulsar entering the Apache
> >>> Incubator.
> >>> Here is a summary of the community developments over the past year:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 1. Pulsar community has done 5 Apache releases since entering
> >>>incubator. The release process is well documented and we have
> >>>had 4 different release managers from 3 different companies.
> >>>
> >>> 2. We have added 3 committers and PPMC members since incubation and
> >>>there are also other candidates who have already made significant
> >>>contributions to the project.
> >>>
> >>> 3. Community of users and people interested in Pulsar has expanded
> >>>considerably. Thanks to the months long work in improving ease of
> >>>use, documentation and blogs, many people became aware of Pulsar
> >>>and started playing with it, then evaluating it and finally
> >>>putting it in production for critical use cases.
> >>>
> >>> 4. We have tried to help users getting started through any
> >>>communication channel. Even though we keep trying to encourage
> >>>people to use the mailing list, most of the first interactions
> >>>have been happening through the Slack channel. We also did make
> >>>sure that:
> >>>
> >>>a) No decisions are taken in Slack channel
> >>>
> >>>b) Developers technical discussion happen mostly in Github
> >>>   issue/Pull-Request or in developers mailing list
> >>>
> >>>c) Conversations in Slack are sent to 

Jenkins build became unstable: pulsar-master #519

[Apache Jenkins Server]

See 

Re: [DRAFT] Pulsar Podling report June 2018

[P. Taylor Goetz]

Okay. Then please plan to include a discussion of progress made with respect to 
brand management in your polling report for September.

-Taylor

> On Jun 7, 2018, at 1:03 AM, Matteo Merli  wrote:
> 
> Hi Taylor,
> 
> The draft was obviously written before the issues were raised on the
> private list. I have already replied on the private@ list on the specific
> and we'll continue to follow up there. I believe a reply in the report
> without the context of the questions would not be very helpful.
> 
> Thanks,
> Matteo
> 
> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 9:26 PM P. Taylor Goetz  > wrote:
> 
>> Thanks for sharing the report draft with dev@. It looks pretty good.
>> 
>> As a mentor, I’d like to see some mention of how the pulsar PPMC plans to
>> address the branding issues raised on private@. I feel pulsar is doing
>> very well in terms of releases, etc., but falling painfully short in terms
>> of adhering to branding guidelines [1][2].
>> 
>> -Taylor
>> 
>> [1] https://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html 
>>  <
>> https://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html 
>> >
>> [2] https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs 
>>  <
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs>
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jun 6, 2018, at 11:57 AM, Matteo Merli  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Here is the draft for the podling report. Please submit feedback soon,
>> the
>>> deadline is today (sorry for sending draft at last moment).
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Pulsar is a highly scalable, low latency messaging platform running on
>>> commodity hardware. It provides simple pub-sub semantics over topics,
>>> guaranteed at-least-once delivery of messages, automatic cursor
>> management
>>> for
>>> subscribers, and cross-datacenter replication.
>>> 
>>> Pulsar has been incubating since 2017-06-01.
>>> 
>>> Most important issues to address in the move towards graduation:
>>> 
>>> 1. Complete the Podling name search tasks. The task is in progress right
>>> now.
>>> 
>>> Any issues that the Incubator PMC (IPMC) or ASF Board wish/need to be
>> aware
>>> of?
>>> 
>>> None
>>> 
>>> How has the community developed since the last report?
>>> 
>>> The community added 7 new contributors that submitted pull-requests
>> which
>>> were merged into master.
>>> 
>>> The number of users approaching the team on the Slack channel has kept
>>> steadily increasing since the last report. Many users have actively
>>> deployed
>>> Pulsar for evaluation and production use cases.
>>> 
>>> Project members from several companies have organized or participated in
>>> several meetups, presenting Pulsar's introductions, deep-dives and
>>> hands-on
>>> tutorial, including recorded podcasts. We have several scheduled talks
>> on
>>> Pulsar at various conferences, 2 at ApacheCon in September, one at OSCon
>>> in
>>> July and 2 others at Strata New York in September. A Pulsar dedicated
>>> meetup
>>> is being organized for next July.
>>> 
>>> Since the last report the number of weekly-active-users on the Slack
>>> channel
>>> has increased from 53 to 88.
>>> 
>>> We have reached the 1 year mark since Pulsar entering the Apache
>>> Incubator.
>>> Here is a summary of the community developments over the past year:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 1. Pulsar community has done 5 Apache releases since entering
>>>incubator. The release process is well documented and we have
>>>had 4 different release managers from 3 different companies.
>>> 
>>> 2. We have added 3 committers and PPMC members since incubation and
>>>there are also other candidates who have already made significant
>>>contributions to the project.
>>> 
>>> 3. Community of users and people interested in Pulsar has expanded
>>>considerably. Thanks to the months long work in improving ease of
>>>use, documentation and blogs, many people became aware of Pulsar
>>>and started playing with it, then evaluating it and finally
>>>putting it in production for critical use cases.
>>> 
>>> 4. We have tried to help users getting started through any
>>>communication channel. Even though we keep trying to encourage
>>>people to use the mailing list, most of the first interactions
>>>have been happening through the Slack channel. We also did make
>>>sure that:
>>> 
>>>a) No decisions are taken in Slack channel
>>> 
>>>b) Developers technical discussion happen mostly in Github
>>>   issue/Pull-Request or in developers mailing list
>>> 
>>>c) Conversations in Slack are sent to dev/user mailing list in a
>>>   daily digest form for archival and to be searchable
>>> 
>>>In any case Slack has been working fairly well in engaging with
>>>users, by providing a tool to have very quick informal
>>>question/answer interactions that were very appreciated by users.
>>> 
>>>  5. Overall, there were a lot of healthy 

RE: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.0.1-incubating Candidate 1

[Nozomi Kurihara]

+1 (binding)

Environment: MacOS 10.13.4

* check sha1, sha512, asc
* Bin distribution
- start standalone
- producer/consumer worked
* Src distribution
- compile and unit tests
- RAT check
- start standalone
- producer/consumer worked

Regards,
Nozomi


差出人: Rajan Dhabalia 
送信日時: 2018年6月6日 15:28:03
宛先: dev@pulsar.incubator.apache.org
件名: Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.0.1-incubating Candidate 1

+1 (binding)

Environment: Mac-OS 10.12.6

Checked:
 - signatures and checksum
 - maven repository artifacts
 - start standalone service and client-test for producer/consumer (src/bin
distribution)
 - rat check on src distribution
 - compile and unit test on src distribution

Environment: REHL-6.7

Build fails on REHL-6.x with error:
"[ERROR]
/home/rdhabalia/pulsar/apache-pulsar-2.0.1-incubating/pulsar-functions/proto/src/main/proto/Request.proto
[0:0]:
/home/rdhabalia/pulsar/apache-pulsar-2.0.1-incubating/pulsar-functions/proto/target/protoc-plugins/protoc-3.5.1-linux-x86_64.exe:
/lib64/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by
/home/rdhabalia/pulsar/apache-pulsar-2.0.1-incubating/pulsar-functions/proto/target/protoc-plugins/protoc-3.5.1-linux-x86_64.exe)"

We had this issue in 2.0.0 as well  but now, we have  fixed this issue in
2.1.0. Build works fine with REHL7 so, we can ignore it for this release.

Thanks,
Rajan


On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 10:43 PM, Matteo Merli  wrote:

> This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version
> 2.0.1-incubating.
>
> This is a patch release that fixes few issues identified in previous
> release 2.0.0-rc1-incubating.
>
> It fixes the following issues:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/milestone/14?closed=1
>
> *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay
> open
> for at least 72 hours ***
>
> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for
> convenience.
>
> Source and binary files:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/pulsar/
> pulsar-2.0.1-incubating-candidate-1/
>
> SHA-1 checksums:
>
> ae1bd6f658ebff0745d5eb82961f400f9872f1da
> apache-pulsar-2.0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz
> 2a22e40f290329ae5fac1d33e9754a67e01e882f
> apache-pulsar-2.0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
>
> Maven staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1019
>
> The tag to be voted upon:
> v2.0.1-incubating-candidate-1 (b18a2689d592ac676ab70a5447cc023e378eda3b)
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/releases/tag/
> v2.0.1-incubating-candidate-1
>
> Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/pulsar/KEYS
>
> Please download the the source package, and follow the README to build
> and run the Pulsar standalone service.
> --
> Matteo Merli
> 
>

Slack digest for #dev - 2018-06-07

[Apache Pulsar Slack]

2018-06-06 17:17:26 UTC - Sanjeev Kulkarni: @Sanjeev Kulkarni has joined the 
channel

2018-06-06 17:17:52 UTC - Sanjeev Kulkarni: getting this stacktrace while 
trying to submitting functions

2018-06-06 17:17:54 UTC - Sanjeev Kulkarni: 09:34:06.995 
[FunctionActionerThread] INFO  
org.apache.pulsar.functions.worker.FunctionActioner - Function package file 
/tmp/
pulsar_functions/public/default/kafkasource/0/utils.jar.0.4f714650-2132-4c9c-afc3-ec3c8e0bfe12
 will be downloaded from packag
ePath: 
“public/default/kafkasource/da9a0037-99af-4989-87ff-c4d5fb17d188-core-0.0.1.jar”

09:34:09.204 [FunctionActionerThread] INFO  
org.apache.pulsar.functions.worker.FunctionActioner - Function package file is 
li
nked from 
/tmp/pulsar_functions/public/default/kafkasource/0/utils.jar.0.4f714650-2132-4c9c-afc3-ec3c8e0bfe12
 to /tmp/pulsar_
functions/public/default/kafkasource/0/utils.jar
09:34:09.211 [FunctionActionerThread] INFO  
org.apache.pulsar.functions.worker.FunctionActioner - Error starting function
java.lang.NullPointerException: null
at 
org.apache.pulsar.functions.worker.FunctionActioner.startFunction(FunctionActioner.java:131)
 ~[org.apache.pulsar-p
ulsar-functions-worker-2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar:2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT]
at 
org.apache.pulsar.functions.worker.FunctionActioner.lambda$new$0(FunctionActioner.java:78)
 ~[org.apache.pulsar-pul
sar-functions-worker-2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar:2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT]
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748) [?:1.8.0_151]
09:34:10.148 [qtp565168593-35] ERROR 
org.apache.pulsar.functions.worker.rest.api.FunctionsImpl - Got Exception 
Getting Status
java.lang.NullPointerException: null
at 
org.apache.pulsar.functions.proto.InstanceCommunication$FunctionStatus$Builder.setFailureException(InstanceCommunication.java:1994)
 
~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-functions-proto-2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar:2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT]
at 
org.apache.pulsar.functions.worker.FunctionRuntimeManager.getFunctionInstanceStatus(FunctionRuntimeManager.java:255)
 
~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-functions-worker-2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar:2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT]
at 
org.apache.pulsar.functions.worker.FunctionRuntimeManager.getAllFunctionStatus(FunctionRuntimeManager.java:318)
 
~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-functions-worker-2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar:2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT]
at 
org.apache.pulsar.functions.worker.rest.api.FunctionsImpl.getFunctionStatus(FunctionsImpl.java:387)
 
[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-functions-worker-2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar:2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT]
at 
org.apache.pulsar.functions.worker.rest.api.v2.FunctionApiV2Resource.getFunctionStatus(FunctionApiV2Resource.java:109)
 
[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-functions-worker-2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar:2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT]
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) 
~[?:1.8.0_151]

2018-06-06 17:17:58 UTC - Sanjeev Kulkarni: this is happening in master

2018-06-06 17:18:18 UTC - Matteo Merli: @Rajan Dhabalia ^^

2018-06-06 17:18:32 UTC - Sanjeev Kulkarni: probably related with 


2018-06-06 17:49:56 UTC - Jerry Peng: @Jerry Peng has joined the channel

2018-06-06 17:57:10 UTC - Sijie Guo: @Rajan Dhabalia are you looking into it? 
or shall we be looking into it? just try to avoid duplicated work in the 
community

2018-06-06 17:58:36 UTC - Rajan Dhabalia: oh..let me check on it

2018-06-06 18:06:15 UTC - Jerry Peng: cool thanks

2018-06-06 18:31:52 UTC - Rajan Dhabalia: i found the issue.. after doing -ve 
testing for #1092, i missed to revert the change.. 

right now, I don't see any unit-test case in `worker` module which touches any 
method of `FunctionActioner`.. so, working on adding unit-test for it..

2018-06-06 19:20:12 UTC - Rajan Dhabalia: added the unit-tests
+1 : Matteo Merli, Sijie Guo, Jerry Peng

2018-06-06 21:49:42 UTC - Sanjeev Kulkarni: @Rajan Dhabalia things are still 
broken

2018-06-06 21:50:34 UTC - Sanjeev Kulkarni: 14:48:58.555 
[FunctionActionerThread] INFO  
org.apache.pulsar.functions.worker.FunctionActioner - Function package file is 
li
nked from 
/tmp/pulsar_functions/public/default/kafkasource/0/utils.jar.0.8d1a446d-f8fa-4e85-a2a2-7247af6ddd2f
 to /tmp/pulsar_
functions/public/default/kafkasource/0/utils.jar
14:48:58.565 [FunctionActionerThread] INFO  
org.apache.pulsar.functions.worker.FunctionActioner - Error starting function
java.lang.NullPointerException: null
at 
org.apache.pulsar.functions.worker.FunctionActioner.startFunction(FunctionActioner.java:132)
 ~[org.apache.pulsar-p
ulsar-functions-worker-2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar:2.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT]
at 
org.apache.pulsar.functions.worker.FunctionActioner.lambda$new$0(FunctionActioner.java:78)
 ~[org.apache.pulsar-pul

Build failed in Jenkins: pulsar-website-build #268

[Apache Jenkins Server]

See 


Changes:

[github] Added authentication support in Go client lib (#1920)

[mmerli] Monitor thread to check if topics need compaction (#1915)

[github] Upgrade Lombok to 1.18.0 to work with JDK 10 (#1923)

[github] fix func pkgUrl validation (#1925)

[mmerli] Add pulsar python client osx vagrant templates (#1919)

[github] Support pulsar source to start consumer with topic patterns (#1903)

[github] fix pkg location init (#1927)

--
[...truncated 702.33 KB...]
import org.apache.commons.lang3.StringUtils;
   ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:33:
 error: package org.apache.http.conn.ssl does not exist
import org.apache.http.conn.ssl.DefaultHostnameVerifier;
   ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:34:
 error: package org.apache.http.conn.ssl does not exist
import org.apache.http.conn.ssl.NoopHostnameVerifier;
   ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:35:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal does not exist
import org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal.BrokerStatsImpl;
  ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:36:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal does not exist
import org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal.BrokersImpl;
  ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:37:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal does not exist
import org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal.ClustersImpl;
  ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:38:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal does not exist
import org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal.FunctionsImpl;
  ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:39:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal does not exist
import org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal.JacksonConfigurator;
  ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:40:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal does not exist
import org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal.LookupImpl;
  ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:41:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal does not exist
import org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal.NamespacesImpl;
  ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:42:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal does not exist
import org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal.NonPersistentTopicsImpl;
  ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:43:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal does not exist
import org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal.TopicsImpl;
  ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:44:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal does not exist
import org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal.TenantsImpl;
  ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:45:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal does not exist
import org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal.PulsarAdminBuilderImpl;
  ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:46:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal does not exist
import org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.internal.ResourceQuotasImpl;
  ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:47:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.api does not exist
import org.apache.pulsar.client.api.Authentication;
   ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:48:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.api does not exist
import org.apache.pulsar.client.api.AuthenticationDataProvider;
   ^
pulsar-client-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/PulsarAdmin.java:49:
 error: package org.apache.pulsar.client.api does not exist
import 

Jenkins build is back to stable : pulsar-master #517

[Apache Jenkins Server]

See