Re: Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release

[Matteo Merli]

I think we're getting closer to the release. Most of the changes marked for
2.0.0 were already merged, there are few tasks on the documentation side
that are getting closed as well.

https://github.com/apache/incubator-pulsar/milestone/12

If there's something that really needs to be added / fixed prior to the
release, please raise your hand. Otherwise, once the pending tasks are
done, I'll start the release process for 2.0.0-rc1.

Matteo

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 10:14 AM Ivan Kelly  wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 10:07 AM, Dave Fisher 
> wrote:
> > Is it possible to have 2.0.0alpha on a Maven Central release?>
>
> Zookeeper do it all the time.
>
> http://search.maven.org/#artifactdetails%7Corg.apache.zookeeper%7Czookeeper%7C3.5.3-beta%7Cpom
>
> -Ivan
>
-- 
Matteo Merli

Re: Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release

[Ivan Kelly]

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 10:07 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> Is it possible to have 2.0.0alpha on a Maven Central release?>

Zookeeper do it all the time.
http://search.maven.org/#artifactdetails%7Corg.apache.zookeeper%7Czookeeper%7C3.5.3-beta%7Cpom

-Ivan

Re: Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release

[Dave Fisher]

Is it possible to have 2.0.0alpha on a Maven Central release?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 19, 2018, at 9:12 AM, Ivan Kelly <iv...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> Why not call it 2.0.0Alpha1, or 2.0.0Beta1? Calling it RC will be
> confusing for people who haven't read this conversation. The only
> problem with alpha or beta is that you won't get a 2.0.0 release in
> the end, but a 2.0.1. Many people don't trust '.0' releases anyhow
> though.
> 
> -Ivan
> 
>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 9:07 AM, Sahaya Andrews <andr...@apache.org> wrote:
>> +1 from me as well.
>> 
>>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 5:10 PM, Nozomi Kurihara <nkuri...@yahoo-corp.jp> 
>>> wrote:
>>> + 1 for releasing RC version early
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ____
>>> 差出人: Jia Zhai <zhaiji...@gmail.com>
>>> 送信日時: 2018年4月19日 4:24
>>> 宛先: dev@pulsar.incubator.apache.org
>>> 件名: Re: Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release
>>> 
>>> +1
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 2:25 PM, Jai Asher <jai.ashe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> +1 for releasing the RC early
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 6:52 PM Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> +1 for releasing an RC version prior to an official release.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Matteo Merli <mme...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I think we are approaching the completion of most major items that were
>>>>>> scheduled for 2.0 release.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Since there is a big number of items that went in, like for example:
>>>>>> * Migrating BookKeeper from Yahoo branch based on 4.3 to main Apache
>>>> 4.7
>>>>>> * Schema
>>>>>> * Topic Compaction
>>>>>> * Functions
>>>>>> * Client API refactorings
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I would suggest to have a "2.0.0-RC1" release, still officially
>>>> released
>>>>>> with regular process, so that we'll have a chance to iron out any bugs,
>>>>>> tools or packaging issue before marking 2.0 as "stable".
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> My idea is use next week to finish up all the pending tasks and
>>>>>> documentation changes and kickoff the release process for 2.0.0-rc1 in
>>>>> the
>>>>>> week after.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Any thoughts with respect to this?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Matteo
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Matteo Merli
>>>>>> <mme...@apache.org>
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 

Re: Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release

[Ivan Kelly]

Why not call it 2.0.0Alpha1, or 2.0.0Beta1? Calling it RC will be
confusing for people who haven't read this conversation. The only
problem with alpha or beta is that you won't get a 2.0.0 release in
the end, but a 2.0.1. Many people don't trust '.0' releases anyhow
though.

-Ivan

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 9:07 AM, Sahaya Andrews <andr...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1 from me as well.
>
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 5:10 PM, Nozomi Kurihara <nkuri...@yahoo-corp.jp> 
> wrote:
>> + 1 for releasing RC version early
>>
>>
>> 
>> 差出人: Jia Zhai <zhaiji...@gmail.com>
>> 送信日時: 2018年4月19日 4:24
>> 宛先: dev@pulsar.incubator.apache.org
>> 件名: Re: Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release
>>
>> +1
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 2:25 PM, Jai Asher <jai.ashe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 for releasing the RC early
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 6:52 PM Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > +1 for releasing an RC version prior to an official release.
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Matteo Merli <mme...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Hi everyone,
>>> > >
>>> > > I think we are approaching the completion of most major items that were
>>> > > scheduled for 2.0 release.
>>> > >
>>> > > Since there is a big number of items that went in, like for example:
>>> > >  * Migrating BookKeeper from Yahoo branch based on 4.3 to main Apache
>>> 4.7
>>> > >  * Schema
>>> > >  * Topic Compaction
>>> > >  * Functions
>>> > >  * Client API refactorings
>>> > >
>>> > > I would suggest to have a "2.0.0-RC1" release, still officially
>>> released
>>> > > with regular process, so that we'll have a chance to iron out any bugs,
>>> > > tools or packaging issue before marking 2.0 as "stable".
>>> > >
>>> > > My idea is use next week to finish up all the pending tasks and
>>> > > documentation changes and kickoff the release process for 2.0.0-rc1 in
>>> > the
>>> > > week after.
>>> > >
>>> > > Any thoughts with respect to this?
>>> > >
>>> > > Matteo
>>> > > --
>>> > > Matteo Merli
>>> > > <mme...@apache.org>
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>

Re: Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release

[Sahaya Andrews]

+1 from me as well.

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 5:10 PM, Nozomi Kurihara <nkuri...@yahoo-corp.jp> wrote:
> + 1 for releasing RC version early
>
>
> 
> 差出人: Jia Zhai <zhaiji...@gmail.com>
> 送信日時: 2018年4月19日 4:24
> 宛先: dev@pulsar.incubator.apache.org
> 件名: Re: Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release
>
> +1
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 2:25 PM, Jai Asher <jai.ashe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 for releasing the RC early
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 6:52 PM Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > +1 for releasing an RC version prior to an official release.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Matteo Merli <mme...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi everyone,
>> > >
>> > > I think we are approaching the completion of most major items that were
>> > > scheduled for 2.0 release.
>> > >
>> > > Since there is a big number of items that went in, like for example:
>> > >  * Migrating BookKeeper from Yahoo branch based on 4.3 to main Apache
>> 4.7
>> > >  * Schema
>> > >  * Topic Compaction
>> > >  * Functions
>> > >  * Client API refactorings
>> > >
>> > > I would suggest to have a "2.0.0-RC1" release, still officially
>> released
>> > > with regular process, so that we'll have a chance to iron out any bugs,
>> > > tools or packaging issue before marking 2.0 as "stable".
>> > >
>> > > My idea is use next week to finish up all the pending tasks and
>> > > documentation changes and kickoff the release process for 2.0.0-rc1 in
>> > the
>> > > week after.
>> > >
>> > > Any thoughts with respect to this?
>> > >
>> > > Matteo
>> > > --
>> > > Matteo Merli
>> > > <mme...@apache.org>
>> > >
>> >
>>

RE: Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release

[Nozomi Kurihara]

+ 1 for releasing RC version early



差出人: Jia Zhai <zhaiji...@gmail.com>
送信日時: 2018年4月19日 4:24
宛先: dev@pulsar.incubator.apache.org
件名: Re: Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release

+1

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 2:25 PM, Jai Asher <jai.ashe...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 for releasing the RC early
>
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 6:52 PM Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1 for releasing an RC version prior to an official release.
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Matteo Merli <mme...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > I think we are approaching the completion of most major items that were
> > > scheduled for 2.0 release.
> > >
> > > Since there is a big number of items that went in, like for example:
> > >  * Migrating BookKeeper from Yahoo branch based on 4.3 to main Apache
> 4.7
> > >  * Schema
> > >  * Topic Compaction
> > >  * Functions
> > >  * Client API refactorings
> > >
> > > I would suggest to have a "2.0.0-RC1" release, still officially
> released
> > > with regular process, so that we'll have a chance to iron out any bugs,
> > > tools or packaging issue before marking 2.0 as "stable".
> > >
> > > My idea is use next week to finish up all the pending tasks and
> > > documentation changes and kickoff the release process for 2.0.0-rc1 in
> > the
> > > week after.
> > >
> > > Any thoughts with respect to this?
> > >
> > > Matteo
> > > --
> > > Matteo Merli
> > > <mme...@apache.org>
> > >
> >
>

Re: Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release

[Jia Zhai]

+1

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 2:25 PM, Jai Asher  wrote:

> +1 for releasing the RC early
>
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 6:52 PM Sijie Guo  wrote:
>
> > +1 for releasing an RC version prior to an official release.
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Matteo Merli  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > I think we are approaching the completion of most major items that were
> > > scheduled for 2.0 release.
> > >
> > > Since there is a big number of items that went in, like for example:
> > >  * Migrating BookKeeper from Yahoo branch based on 4.3 to main Apache
> 4.7
> > >  * Schema
> > >  * Topic Compaction
> > >  * Functions
> > >  * Client API refactorings
> > >
> > > I would suggest to have a "2.0.0-RC1" release, still officially
> released
> > > with regular process, so that we'll have a chance to iron out any bugs,
> > > tools or packaging issue before marking 2.0 as "stable".
> > >
> > > My idea is use next week to finish up all the pending tasks and
> > > documentation changes and kickoff the release process for 2.0.0-rc1 in
> > the
> > > week after.
> > >
> > > Any thoughts with respect to this?
> > >
> > > Matteo
> > > --
> > > Matteo Merli
> > > 
> > >
> >
>

Re: Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release

[Sijie Guo]

+1 for releasing an RC version prior to an official release.

On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Matteo Merli  wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I think we are approaching the completion of most major items that were
> scheduled for 2.0 release.
>
> Since there is a big number of items that went in, like for example:
>  * Migrating BookKeeper from Yahoo branch based on 4.3 to main Apache 4.7
>  * Schema
>  * Topic Compaction
>  * Functions
>  * Client API refactorings
>
> I would suggest to have a "2.0.0-RC1" release, still officially released
> with regular process, so that we'll have a chance to iron out any bugs,
> tools or packaging issue before marking 2.0 as "stable".
>
> My idea is use next week to finish up all the pending tasks and
> documentation changes and kickoff the release process for 2.0.0-rc1 in the
> week after.
>
> Any thoughts with respect to this?
>
> Matteo
> --
> Matteo Merli
> 
>

Re: Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release

[Matteo Merli]

Yes, the 1.x client can be used with a 2.x broker and vice-versa.

Also it has been tested the upgrade and rollback scenario. Eg: live upgrade
a cluster to 2.0 and rollback to 1.22 in case of any unexpected problem.

It would be nice to automate this tests with the integration framework that
Ivan has added.



On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 9:50 AM Joe F  wrote:

> Is client API compatibility and upgrade procedure working with the previous
> version?
>
> Joe
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Matteo Merli  wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I think we are approaching the completion of most major items that were
> > scheduled for 2.0 release.
> >
> > Since there is a big number of items that went in, like for example:
> >  * Migrating BookKeeper from Yahoo branch based on 4.3 to main Apache 4.7
> >  * Schema
> >  * Topic Compaction
> >  * Functions
> >  * Client API refactorings
> >
> > I would suggest to have a "2.0.0-RC1" release, still officially released
> > with regular process, so that we'll have a chance to iron out any bugs,
> > tools or packaging issue before marking 2.0 as "stable".
> >
> > My idea is use next week to finish up all the pending tasks and
> > documentation changes and kickoff the release process for 2.0.0-rc1 in
> the
> > week after.
> >
> > Any thoughts with respect to this?
> >
> > Matteo
> > --
> > Matteo Merli
> > 
> >
>
-- 
Matteo Merli

Re: Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release

[Joe F]

Is client API compatibility and upgrade procedure working with the previous
version?

Joe


On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Matteo Merli  wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I think we are approaching the completion of most major items that were
> scheduled for 2.0 release.
>
> Since there is a big number of items that went in, like for example:
>  * Migrating BookKeeper from Yahoo branch based on 4.3 to main Apache 4.7
>  * Schema
>  * Topic Compaction
>  * Functions
>  * Client API refactorings
>
> I would suggest to have a "2.0.0-RC1" release, still officially released
> with regular process, so that we'll have a chance to iron out any bugs,
> tools or packaging issue before marking 2.0 as "stable".
>
> My idea is use next week to finish up all the pending tasks and
> documentation changes and kickoff the release process for 2.0.0-rc1 in the
> week after.
>
> Any thoughts with respect to this?
>
> Matteo
> --
> Matteo Merli
> 
>

Plan for Pulsar 2.0 release

[Matteo Merli]

Hi everyone,

I think we are approaching the completion of most major items that were
scheduled for 2.0 release.

Since there is a big number of items that went in, like for example:
 * Migrating BookKeeper from Yahoo branch based on 4.3 to main Apache 4.7
 * Schema
 * Topic Compaction
 * Functions
 * Client API refactorings

I would suggest to have a "2.0.0-RC1" release, still officially released
with regular process, so that we'll have a chance to iron out any bugs,
tools or packaging issue before marking 2.0 as "stable".

My idea is use next week to finish up all the pending tasks and
documentation changes and kickoff the release process for 2.0.0-rc1 in the
week after.

Any thoughts with respect to this?

Matteo
-- 
Matteo Merli