[GitHub] storm issue #1067: STORM-1515: Reset LocalState if corrupted after a hard re...

Github user torbiak commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1067 I won't be able to work on it anytime soon. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature

[GitHub] storm pull request #1067: STORM-1515: Reset LocalState if corrupted after a ...

Github user torbiak closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1067 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is

[GitHub] storm issue #1468: STORM-1885. python script for squashing and merging prs.

Github user ptgoetz commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1468 I'm okay with automating the merge process, just not the way it is implemented here. Perhaps we shouldmove the discussion to the dev list. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to

[GitHub] storm issue #1468: STORM-1885. python script for squashing and merging prs.

Github user ptgoetz commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1468 I'll also point out that the "if other Apache projects do it, it is oaky" stance is particularly dangerous. PMC members must understand ASF policy and not rely on what other projects do. If what

[GitHub] storm issue #1468: STORM-1885. python script for squashing and merging prs.

Github user HeartSaVioR commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1468 I'm totally +1 to this approach, even though I think script should be modified to Storm's project style. Like I said to dev@ mailing list, I have been doing reviewing and merging

[GitHub] storm issue #1468: STORM-1885. python script for squashing and merging prs.

Github user ptgoetz commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1468 I'll second @knusbaum's -1. Based on points I made earlier. This has the potntial to automatically destroy code provenance, especially if more than one contributor is involved in a pull request.

[GitHub] storm issue #1468: STORM-1885. python script for squashing and merging prs.

Github user knusbaum commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1468 -1 I am generally opposed to this. Most PRs only have a small number of commits and aren't a problem. For PRs with a large number of commits, it's simple enough to ask the contributor to squash

[GitHub] storm pull request #1396: [storm-elasticsearch]Upgrade elasticsearch version...

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1396 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is

[GitHub] storm issue #1396: [storm-elasticsearch]Upgrade elasticsearch version from 1...

Github user knusbaum commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1396 I'm going to close this. We're not going to drop 1.x support and there's another PR up adding support for 2.x without dropping 1.x. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this

[GitHub] storm issue #1337: STORM-1475: Add storm-elasticsearch2 module

Github user knusbaum commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1337 #1676 is a no-go. We need guava in storm-core. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this

[GitHub] storm pull request #1154: fix storm-starter README.markdown links

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1154 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is

[GitHub] storm issue #1154: fix storm-starter README.markdown links

Github user knusbaum commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1154 This has been fixed elsewhere. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled

[GitHub] storm pull request #1290: [YSTORM-1661] Added acl validation config 1.x Bran...

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1290 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is

[GitHub] storm issue #1290: [YSTORM-1661] Added acl validation config 1.x Branch PR

Github user knusbaum commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1290 This was cherry picked. Closing. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled

[GitHub] storm pull request #1538: Sending the Data to Kafka as a batch, instead of s...

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1538 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is

[GitHub] storm issue #1538: Sending the Data to Kafka as a batch, instead of sending ...

Github user knusbaum commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1538 I'm going to close this PR. It hasn't been touched in a few months, it is still missing a Jira, and we have decided to halt any non-bug work on 10.* branches. In addition, it looks to me

[GitHub] storm issue #1316: [STORM-1642] Catch Exception when deserialization failed....

Github user knusbaum commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1316 If you want to clean up the log messages, this still looks good. We'd want this instead to go into master and 1.x, though. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and

[GitHub] storm pull request #1242: Storm 1643 - Performance Fix: Optimize clojure loo...

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1242 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is

[GitHub] storm issue #1242: Storm 1643 - Performance Fix: Optimize clojure lookups re...

Github user knusbaum commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1242 This hasn't been updated for ~7 months, and I'm -1 on the concept anyhow, so I'm going to close it. If you'd like to discuss, feel free to reopen. --- If your project is set up for it,

[GitHub] storm issue #1067: STORM-1515: Reset LocalState if corrupted after a hard re...

Github user knusbaum commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1067 @torbiak Would you like to do work on this, or should it be closed? --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project

[GitHub] storm pull request #647: (STORM-956) When the execute() or nextTuple() hang ...

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/647 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is

[GitHub] storm issue #1018: Improve mention of aggregate() in the partitionAggregate(...

Github user knusbaum commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1018 +1 I'm fine with this change. If you want to upmerge, I'll get it in. Otherwise I plan to close this in a few weeks or so. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and

[GitHub] storm issue #647: (STORM-956) When the execute() or nextTuple() hang on exte...

Github user knusbaum commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/647 Closing this. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if

Re: [DISCUSS] Receiving branch(es) for storm-jms

For me master and 1.x would be good places to land, given that we are planning to release 1.1.0 soon. - Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) On Wed, 5 Oct 2016 at 2:34 AM Bobby Evans wrote: > +1 on those. Not sure if 1.0.x is the best place as it is a new feature > (but it

[GitHub] storm issue #1710: STORM-1546: Adding Read and Write Aggregations for Pacema...

Github user knusbaum commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1710 Documentation updated. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes

[GitHub] storm issue #1723: STORM-2131: Add blob command to worker-launcher, make sto...

Github user kishorvpatil commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1723 +1 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the

Re: [DISCUSS] Receiving branch(es) for storm-jms

+1 on those.  Not sure if 1.0.x is the best place as it is a new feature (but it is separate from storm-core so I am OK with it) - Bobby On Tuesday, October 4, 2016 12:24 PM, P. Taylor Goetz wrote: The IP Clearance for storm-jms has passed and we are clear to import

[DISCUSS] Receiving branch(es) for storm-jms

The IP Clearance for storm-jms has passed and we are clear to import the code. What branches do we want it to land in? My initial thoughts are master, 1.x and 1.0.x., but I’m curious to hear others’ thoughts. -Taylor signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail