Re: FYI - zetcd: running ZooKeeper apps without ZooKeeper

Yeah, that's a good reference, thanks for starting the thread. @phunt I see a lot of systems trying to implement the API of others in the same space hoping that they can make the migration easier. I feel that it isn't so much about us being a de facto standard, but more about the widespread use.

Re: Build failure for recent commit

One of the project committers needs to cut a release candidate and put it up for a vote. If it is a bug fix release, then it should be relatively straightforward. -Flavio > On 06 Jun 2017, at 20:39, Ben Sherman wrote: > > Looking at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1748 and > h

New PMC Member: Michael Han

I'm very happy to announce that the Apache ZooKeeper PMC has voted to invite Michael Han to join the PMC and Michael accepted. Michael has done outstanding work in the community over the recent past and we felt it was time for Michael to deepen his level of engagement by joining the PMC. Please

Criticism on ZK

Hello community, I came across this blog post: https://banzaicloud.com/blog/kafka-on-etcd/ And I thought it would be a good idea to discuss the criticism as a community. Let me copy the points here and add some notes: • Unlike Kafka it does not have a vibrant and huge community (

Re: Review request for ZOOKEEPER-2845

Give me some time to catch up with the discussion thread in the issue, please. -Flavio > On 5 Feb 2018, at 15:43, Bobby Evans wrote: > > I was really hoping to get a review for ZOOKEEPER-2845 > > https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/453 (master) > https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/4

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

We have this section in the admin doc that talks about the system requirements: https://zookeeper.apache.org/doc/r3.5.3-beta/zookeeperAdmin.html#sc_requiredSoftware If we change, then we have to update that s

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

ient and Java 8 for >> the server will require a new way of packaging the artifacts and building >> the project (and this will require separating client side and server side >> code base). >> Maybe I am missing something. >> >> >> Enrico >> >> >

Re: [Discuss] ZOOKEEPER-2982 DNS negative caching in 3.5

Thanks for catching this, Eron. It looks like the port to 3.5 misses changes as you correctly pointed out: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/commit/d2a49163b7bc7c9589140dbba7f60e591028f908 In partic

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

e.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html) > - I would not upgrade Java to a non-LTS version. > > > What do you think about it? > > Thanks, Tamaas > > > On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 10:32 PM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >> I'm fine with moving to Java 8 or even

Re: Let's cut a ZK 3.5.4-beta release

I think ZK-2901 is close to being merged, yes? And with that, will we cut a 3.5.4 release? -Flavio > On 7 Dec 2017, at 00:27, Patrick Hunt wrote: > > I haven't forgotten about this - we've been stuck on ZOOKEEPER-2901 . I > think we getting closer but it's been tricky to navigate addressing th

Re: Let's cut a ZK 3.5.4-beta release

There are 10 open blocker issues marked for 3.5.4. Can I get some help to sort out those issues? https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/ZOOKEEPER/versions/12340141 -Flavio > On 14 Mar 2018, at 12:28, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > > 2018-03-14 12:26 GMT+01:00 Flavio Junqueira : > &

Re: Let's cut a ZK 3.5.4-beta release

d more eyes on 2901 though. > > Patrick > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 4:26 AM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >> I think ZK-2901 is close to being merged, yes? And with that, will we cut >> a 3.5.4 release? >> >> -Flavio >> >>> On 7 Dec 2017, at 00

Re: 3.4.12

+1 for cutting a 3.4.12 RC. Thanks for volunteering, Abe. -Flavio > On 8 Mar 2018, at 18:53, Rakesh Radhakrishnan wrote: > > Appreciate Abe for the initiative and efforts! > > +1, for "3.4.12" releasing. > > Please feel free to ping me if any help needed when making this release. > > Regards

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.12 candidate 0

We should consider not using md5 for the next RC as per the ASF policy: https://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution.html#sigs-and-sums -Flavio > On 26 Mar 2018, at 21:37, Abraham Fine wrote: > > Thank you everyone for your votes to far. Due to the issues that Michael Han > pointed

Re: [VOTE] Migrate ZK to Maven build

Definitely +1 > On 20 Apr 2018, at 16:06, Norbert Kalmar wrote: > > Hi, > > Let's start a vote on migrating to maven instead of ant. > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-3021 > > *Shall we migrate ZooKeeper build from ant to Maven?* > > Please reply with [Yes / +1] or [No / -1] t

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.12 candidate 1

+1, verified the following: - checksums and signature - build passes - rat tool output does not indicate any problem - LICENSE and NOTICE look both ok - local simple smoke tests work -Flavio > On 2 Apr 2018, at 02:01, Michael Han wrote: > > +1 > > - verified xsum/sig. > - release notes looks

Re: Let's cut a ZK 3.5.4-beta release

use: >>>> https://goo.gl/3MJZMN >>>> >>>> Just had a chance to go through the JIRA and did some clean ups. >>>> - 1159: lower the priority from blocker to major. >>>> - 761: resolved because the code is merged. >>>> >>>&

Re: Let's cut a ZK 3.5.4-beta release

at 2:00 PM, Alexander Shraer wrote: > >> Lets also get this in: https://issues.apache.org/ >> jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2959 >> This affects anyone running observers. >> >> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 1:45 PM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: >> >>> We should strongly

Re: Name resolution in StaticHostProvider

Hi Andor, Thanks for your work on addressing the issue. > On 8 May 2018, at 16:06, Andor Molnar wrote: > > Hi, > > Updating this thread, because the PR is still being review on GitHub. > > So, the reason why I refactored the original behaviour of > StaticHostProvider is that I believe that it

Re: Name resolution in StaticHostProvider

g > getByName() you don't necessarily fire a DNS request, only when the TTL is > expired. > > Andor > > > > > On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 8:12 AM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >> Hi Andor, >> >> Thanks for your work on addressing the issue. &

Re: Name resolution in StaticHostProvider

brought upon in the PR. -Flavio > On 8 May 2018, at 21:08, Andor Molnar wrote: > > I'm happy to do that once we have an agreement. > > > > > On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 8:34 AM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >> It might be a good idea to document whatever we end up

Re: Name resolution in StaticHostProvider

; 1. Do we need to refactor at all? > 2. If we do so, shall next() throw UnknownHostException or deal with error > inside. > > And I'd still go with: > 1. Yes > 2. Yes, throw > > So, I would leave the PR as it is now. > > Andor > > > > > >

Question on merge script

Could anyone remind me why we don't have the merge script on branch-3.5? Say I have a change that targets branch-3.5 alone. Shouldn't I be able to have a PR that targets branch-3.5 and use the merge script? Thanks, -Flavio

Re: Question on merge script

do what you > asked. > > On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >> Could anyone remind me why we don't have the merge script on branch-3.5? >> Say I have a change that targets branch-3.5 alone. Shouldn't I be able to >> have a PR tha

Re: Name resolution in StaticHostProvider

I like the idea of indicating to the application that there is something wrong with the list of servers so that it has a chance to look into it. With the current code in `ClientCnxn`, we will log at warn level and hope that someone sees it, but we are not really stopping the client. Throwing mig

Re: Name resolution in StaticHostProvider

like. -Flavio > On 9 May 2018, at 16:44, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > > I like the idea of indicating to the application that there is something > wrong with the list of servers so that it has a chance to look into it. With > the current code in `ClientCnxn`, we will log at warn

Re: Question on merge script

Thanks for the feedback, Pat. I think the wiki page with merge script instructions needs updating. I'll explore it a bit further and will update it. -Flavio > On 9 May 2018, at 20:05, Patrick Hunt wrote: > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 1:18 AM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >>

Re: ZooKeeper clients does not handle new error codes properly

Hi Arshad, It makes sense to me. What if we convert unknown server errors to KeeperException.SystemErrorException? This is a generic error and it extends KeeperException. I don't see it as a big issue to make this change, but others may feel differently. If we do it, then we will need a releas

Re: ZooKeeper clients does not handle new error codes properly

October 2016 10:27 > To: u...@zookeeper.apache.org > Cc: DevZooKeeper > Subject: Re: ZooKeeper clients does not handle new error codes properly > > did we bump the protocol version when we added the new errors? the server > could do the conversion when it responds to older clients. >

Re: [VOTE] move Apache Zookeeper to git

, or in the future > with gerrit) to do code reviews? > > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 6:05 AM, Edward Ribeiro > wrote: > >> Cool, just open https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2597 >> >> PS: I removed the REPO_HOME global variable. &

Re: [VOTE] move Apache Zookeeper to git

ments between github and ASF > JIRA is acceptable? Though I feel it would be really useful if comments > could converge in a single place as well, that will provide a clear history > for a given technical issue. > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Flavio Junqueira <mailto

Re: [VOTE] move Apache Zookeeper to git

nce, any PRs or *comments* on PRs that >> include a JIRA ticket ID will trigger an update on that specific ticket >> >> I checked a couple Kafka and Spark JIRAs but I don't see any of the >> comments made in github PR were posted on JIRA, except the activities (open

Re: Important issues that need merging

Thanks for bringing it up to our attention, Jordan. I can take on ZK-2169, it has been sitting in my review queue anyway. Could any other committer pick ZK-1525, please? As I understand, ZK 2143 is resolved and part of ZK-1525 now. -Flavio > On 06 Oct 2016, at 14:53, Jordan Zimmerman > wrote:

Re: Bug in the c-binding in "zoo_remove_watchers"

Hey Eyal, Thanks for reporting this issue and producing a patch. We actually have some guidelines for contributing described here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToContribute Could you please repo

Re: [VOTE] move Apache Zookeeper to git

;> the >>> patch file to JIRA. >>> >>> >>> +1 about having a 'paper trail' of review comments on JIRA and/or mailing >>> list (I would prefer the mailing list tbh). But as Michael and Flavio >>> pointed out, I never seen GH PR review **commen

3.6.0-alpha release?

Hello there, There are a few things interesting in trunk, like the TTL nodes feature and the performance improvement in ZK-2024, and I've been wondering if it would make sense to cut an alpha release for folks to start testing. Points to keep in mind are: - Positive: There are features that wo

Re: svn ref in build.xml

What's the problem exactly, Ben? Could you create a jira and propose a patch or at least describe the issue? -Flavio > On 19 Oct 2016, at 18:25, Benjamin Reed wrote: > > build.xml still has some svn stuff in it. can someone fix? pat? > > thanx > ben

Test plan for ZK-1045 - Call for volunteers

Michael Han posted an update to the test plan to the jira and I want to call the attention of the community to it. It is a big change that we need to be extra careful about because it is supposed to go to the 3.4 branch. It'd be great to have more folks in the community involved with the testing

Re: Test plan for ZK-1045 - Call for volunteers

ure. It would be really great to see the > test/review/usability feedback. Thanks! > > > Rakesh > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >> Michael Han posted an update to the test plan to the jira and I want to >> call the attention of th

Re: [VOTE] move Apache Zookeeper to git

a page there yet. Any help? > Done. -Flavio > > On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Michael Han wrote: > >> FYI infra did some work in INFRA-12752 and the git PR comments can be >> pushed to Apache JIRA. >> >> On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 8:01 AM, Flavio Junqueira

Re: [VOTE] move Apache Zookeeper to git

ocument/d/1i00ZXjrW2fu17vr_h7F1bUrq >>> Xg3urw4Hm7KirQDpPIU/edit >>> (still very crude, but feel free to improve it). I would like to move >>> this >>> text to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Index but >>> looks like I don

Re: QA github pre-commit queue

There is no need to create an INFRA jira, I'm taking care of it, stay tuned. In the meanwhile, please submit patches as usual through jira to trigger QA. -Flavio > On 27 Oct 2016, at 16:54, Edward Ribeiro wrote: > > Dear community, > > As part of the github move, we are still lacking the plum

Re: QA github pre-commit queue

Em 27 de out de 2016 1:56 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" escreveu: > >> There is no need to create an INFRA jira, I'm taking care of it, stay >> tuned. In the meanwhile, please submit patches as usual through jira to >> trigger QA. >> >> -Flavio >

Re: QA github pre-commit queue

ough that one >> might >> be tricky since there are attached patches and a pr. should the pr still be >> qaed? >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Han wrote: >> >>> Created PR94 to ZOOKEEPER-2014. It's been 2 hours, and no QA

Re: QA github pre-commit queue

clearly some polishing to be done, so please report back so that we can try to fix it. -Flavio > On 27 Oct 2016, at 22:24, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > > Yeah, I tried to trigger the 761 manually and it didn't work. I need to work > on the manual trigger. > > The issue wi

Re: QA github pre-commit queue

upon committing the pull request. -Flavio > On 28 Oct 2016, at 15:14, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > > Here is my progress so far. I managed to get the build to trigger with a pull > request and pull request changes: > > https://builds.apache.org/view/PreCommit%20Builds/job/P

Re: QA github pre-commit queue

ailable', but it > should be easy to do this. Also, it doesn't cancel the patch if the PR is > closed, but I guess it can also be done (although I am afraid I don't know > how to do this automatically). > > The zk-merge-pr.py automatically resolve the jira issue on

Re: QA github pre-commit queue

Can I get reviews on ZOOKEEPER-2624/Pull Request #97, please? Once that gets in, we will have pull request QA working. Thanks, -Flavio > On 31 Oct 2016, at 18:26, Edward Ribeiro wrote: > > My comments below: > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > &

Re: Jenkins issue

The last 3 builds failed that way and nothing has changed as far as I know. If it persists, we should open an infra ticket. -Flavio > On 03 Nov 2016, at 19:26, Jordan Zimmerman wrote: > > The pre-build for ZOOKEEPER-1525 is failing with this error. Any ideas? > > BUILD FAILED > /home/jenkins/

Re: Jenkins issue

ion so it caught > more issues? I guess we should try to fix these warnings in a separate jira > if they are legitimate. > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >> The last 3 builds failed that way and nothing has changed as far as I >> know. If it pers

Re: Jenkins issue

nd > some problems?) > > Or, your build was caught in the middle cf the upgrade and things will work > just fine now. > > Gav… So yes, it has been upgraded. -Flavio > On 04 Nov 2016, at 17:29, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > > Agreed, we should have a ticket to look into t

[DISCUSS] QA github pre-commit queue

wondering if folks would be ok with only having patches submitted via pull requests or if we should continue to support the old Jira QA. Thanks, -Flavio > On 02 Nov 2016, at 15:58, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > > Can I get reviews on ZOOKEEPER-2624/Pull Request #97, please? Once that gets

How to contribute with pull requests

I have started a section in the "How to Contribute" doc to start documenting the process to contribute with pull requests: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToContribute The only constraint we currently have is that the title needs to match the jira title because we u

Re: [DISCUSS] QA github pre-commit queue

gt; >>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 8:04 AM, Edward Ribeiro >> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I am +1 about having patches submitted via PRs. IMHO, we should disable >>> the >>>> Jira QA altogether, but have the tool upload the *.patch file to J

Re: QA for pull requests

I have made some changes to fix a couple issues with the QA for pull requests. Can I have a committer checking it out, please? We need to have this in otherwise the builds will keep failing. The issue is ZOOKEEPER-2631 and the pull request is this one: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/1

Re: QA for pull requests

Second attempt, could any of the committers of this project take a look at this, please? -Flavio > On 11 Nov 2016, at 08:11, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > > I have made some changes to fix a couple issues with the QA for pull > requests. Can I have a committer checking it out, please

Merge script

I've used the merge script and it works great... mostly. I had an issue with the jira bit and I'm not entirely sure what the problem is, but I can use some help. It is probably something silly on my end. I have installed the jira package with pip, like the merge script recommends: Cou

Re: Merge script

ecause I should have put 'jira' > (lowercase). > > The library is this one: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/jira/ > > Edward > > Em 13 de nov de 2016 10:13 PM, "Michael Han" escreveu: > > Would 'sudo pip install jira' work for you? > > On

ZK-2014

I have merged ZK-2014, many thanks to Michael for the work, that's an important issue for this project. One thing missing with respect to ZK-2014 is documentation. The pull request contained doc changes, but I didn't want to mess with the work of the merge script so I haven't regenerated the do

Re: Upcoming 3.4/3.5 releases.

We need to regenerate the documentation to include recent changes. I have created ZK-2635 and assigned to myself. It should be simple enough, though. I've marked the fix version to include 3.5.3 and 3.6.0, but I'm not sure if anything has been merged recently into the 3.4 branch that had documen

Re: Test plan for ZK-1045 - Call for volunteers

ig=/var/tmp/ >>>> test/1/conf/jaas.conf >>>>> -Djavax.security.auth.useSubjectCredsOnly=false" >>>>> >>>>> conf/jaas.conf: >>>>> >>>>> QuorumServer { >>>>> com.sun.security.auth.modul

Re: committing doc changes

As part of the release process, we only copy the documentation, see it here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease I think the reason we have gone this way is to avoid issues compiling the document

Re: committing doc changes

we could also build the doc as part of the tests. > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 3:26 PM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: >> As part of the release process, we only copy the documentation, see it here: >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease >

Re: Upcoming 3.4/3.5 releases.

can progress. > > Patrick > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >> We need to regenerate the documentation to include recent changes. I have >> created ZK-2635 and assigned to myself. It should be simple enough, though. >> I've mark

Re: Upcoming 3.4/3.5 releases.

gt; over 2 years. A large of number of companies have deployed 3.5 in production. > The horse has left the barn on this one. > > -Jordan > > >> On Dec 11, 2016, at 11:45 AM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: >> >> It is not the inclusion of ZK-2014 that is being questi

Digests and signatures missing

I was checking the Apache mirrors and our releases do not seem to have the typical MD5 and SHA1 digests that we check for the release candidates. What's going on here, have we not been publishing those as part of releasing? http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/zookeeper/ -Flavio

Re: Digests and signatures missing

> where the tar ball file > includes zookeeper-3.5.2-alpha.jar.asc, zookeeper-3.5.2-alpha.jar.md5, > and zookeeper-3.5.2-alpha.jar.sha1, which I assume is the signature files > you refer to. > > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 3:55 AM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >> I was

CHANGES.txt?

Could anyone remind me of what we decided for CHANGES.txt? Are we supposed to add resolved jiras to it or are we going to rely on the git log? I have committed ZK-761 to master without the change to CHANGES.txt, but then I noticed that some commits are going in with it, so I did it to the 3.5 br

Re: ZooKeeper 3.5.2-alpha Release Coordination

ZK-2366 and ZK-2247 should be ready for commit shortly. We aren't including ZK-1045 in 3.5.2, right? -Flavio > On 21 Jun 2016, at 17:43, Patrick Hunt wrote: > > Can we set a deadline/date for the release? It's fine to have blockers > while we're still in alpha. We should cut a release for folk

Re: Official Docker Image

ained by upstream >>>>* https://github.com/carlossg/docker-maven >>>>* https://github.com/docker-solr/docker-solr >>>> >>>>So I guess it can be OK for me to maintain the image. But we really >>>> need to figure it o

Re: Article about configuration management with Etcd, Consul and ZooKeeper

Quote: "ZooKeeper is sort of the "grandpa" among the subjects." how cute... > On 24 Jun 2016, at 15:46, Alexander Shraer wrote: > > http://www.admin-magazine.com/Archive/2015/29/The-advantages-of-configuration-management-tools

Re: Official Docker Image

lay/ZOOKEEPER/ZKClientBindings I > don't see why we couldn't create a "Running ZooKeeper in Containers" type > of wiki page and link from that. > > Patrick > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >> Let's resume this on

Re: ZooKeeper 3.5.2-alpha Release Coordination

>>> --Chris Nauroth >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 6/21/16, 10:08 AM, "Patrick Hunt" wrote: >>> >>>> 1045 is currently only against 3.4. Once we have that solid I would think >>>> we'd port it to 3.5 an

Re: election algorithm for the observer

Maybe it is better if we walk through an example in which you think we can have a better observer-specific implementation. Feel free to start a jira so that we can discuss it. -Flavio > On 27 Jun 2016, at 23:02, Ryan Zhang wrote: > > Hi, We (twitter) zookeeper cluster ( based on 3.4.x) recen

Vote on release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 0

I want to reinforce the message and encourage everyone, not only committers and PMC members, to test and vote on the release candidate. I can't stress enough how important it is for the quality of the release that multiple folks test with their systems to make sure that the RC is good. If you d

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 0

-1, In the last update of ZK-2235, we didn't remove servlet-api-2.5.LICENSE.txt, so the licensing information is incorrect. I'll submit a patch shortly. Since we are on the topic, I'm wondering if we need to bubble up the contents of the netty notice file as well that comes in the jar. Before

ZK-2458 and ZK-2459

I have submitted two patches to fix the license issues I found. Id' appreciate if someone could have a look at them and possibly check them in if LG. Thanks, -Flavio

Re: ZK-2458 and ZK-2459

Thank you, Pat. Have a nice break! -Flavio > On 30 Jun 2016, at 05:14, Patrick Hunt wrote: > > Thanks Flavio. I reviewed/committed both of them. > > Patrick > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 4:03 PM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >> I have submitted two patches to fix

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 0

3.5 and trunk branches if you want to cut >>> another RC. These two patches addressed the concerns raised by Flavio. >>> >>> Patrick >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Flavio Junqueira >> wrote: >>> >>>> -1, In the last update of Z

Re: ZK-2458 and ZK-2459

lan, please let me know. > > --Chris Nauroth > > > > > On 6/30/16, 12:29 AM, "Flavio Junqueira" wrote: > >> Thank you, Pat. Have a nice break! >> >> -Flavio >> >>> On 30 Jun 2016, at 05:14, Patrick Hunt wrote: >>> >>

Re: etcd3

Although this is a response to Jordan’s message, it isn’t targeting only Jordan. There are a few things that are important to address in this thread and I actually don’t want to focus much on the comparison to other systems. There is apparently this perception that only committers can do stuff

Re: Backporting ZOOKEEPER-2120 (SSL support) to 3.4.8

Hi Luciano, The 3.4 branch is stable and we are only releasing bug fixes at this point, so it is currently not an option to back port. We are all pretty eager to see the 3.5 branch stable, and we are in the process of voting the release candidate for 3.5.2, but that's still tagged as alpha. We

Re: Backporting ZOOKEEPER-2120 (SSL support) to 3.4.8

ur own private fork while we wait for the 3.5? > I would like your help understanding how easy/difficult this may be. > > Regards > Luciano > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:23 AM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >> Hi Luciano, >> >> The 3.4 branch is stable and we a

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1

+1 - Checked license information - Ran RAT tool - Ran tests - Ran some smoke tests - Verified digests and signature - Checked release notes All of the above LGTM -Flavio > On 01 Jul 2016, at 08:45, Chris Nauroth wrote: > > This is a release candidate for 3.5.2-alpha. The full release notes a

RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)

ail.com> wrote: > >> +1 >> >> - built zookeeper jar from source, >> - ran unit test cases, few zkCli commands, few four letter words, >> - tested few scenarios against Hadoop-2.7.2 version(3 node Kerberos secure >> cluster environment). >> >> Thanks

Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)

lavio > On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:19, Edward Ribeiro wrote: > > Hi Flavio, > > > On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Flavio Junqueira <mailto:f...@apache.org>> wrote: > Hey Eddie, > > A few comments on your points: > > > > > - the copyright notice is

Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)

able to figure out yet the issue with the Zookeeper_simpleSystem tests. I have also found something strange with the multi tests. I have created ZK-2463 for this problem and made it a blocker for 3.5.3. -Flavio > On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:25, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > > I have spun a ne

Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)

give some love to the C client in the next release. > Overall, how are people feeling about the RC1 [VOTE] at this point? Is > anyone considering a -1, or shall we proceed (keeping in mind it's an > alpha) with the intent of fixing things in a more rapid 3.5.3 release > cycle? I&

Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)

more folks >> trying it out and stabilize 3.5 version eventually. Probably will listen to >> others opinion as well. >> >> -Rakesh >> >> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 12:32 AM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: >> >>> >>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 17

Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)

I forgot to fill in the name of the test giving the connection errors below, it is testFirstServerDown in Zookeeper_simpleSystem (TestClient.cc <http://testclient.cc/>). -Flavio > On 04 Jul 2016, at 23:53, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >> >> On 04 Jul 2016, at 22:01,

Re: ZooKeeper 3.4.9 release discussion

Thanks for bootstrapping the release process for 3.4.9. ZK-1045 is a major change and I suggest we give time for folks to try it out before cutting a release candidate. Ideally, we check it in and give a few weeks until we cut a release candidate. One of the blockers, ZK-2314 has only one remai

Re: Status: Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1

Yeah, the bind test also fails for me consistently, ZK-1256 did not solve it. I don't get any other junit test failures, though. -Flavio > On 07 Jul 2016, at 14:46, Camille Fournier wrote: > > I'm working on it, but I've got test failures here because we have so many > flaky tests, and I can't

Re: ZooKeeper release validation cluster access

We could consider using vagrant and something like ducktape (for Kafka): https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/tutorial+-+set+up+and+run+Kafka+system+tests+with+ducktape As

Re: Script to spin up ZK cluster

Awesome, thanks for doing this, Michael. -Flavio > On 12 Jul 2016, at 12:01, Michael Han wrote: > > Hi Devs, > > I just posted some scripts that can automate installation of ZK on a > provisioned cluster. > https://github.com/hanm/zk-devops/tree/master/ansible > > Please give it a try if you

Re: unexpected server response ZRUNTIMEINCONSISTENCY

Yeah, it looks like you're getting an unexpected xid, out of order or one response got lost somehow. As Pat says, it would be great to have a way of reproducing the problem. -Flavio > On 28 Jun 2016, at 22:55, Pradeepa Kumar wrote: > > Thanks > version is > Zookeeper version: 3.5.1-alpha--1,

Re: Backporting ZOOKEEPER-2120 (SSL support) to 3.4.8

: > >> Quick question, ZK-2125 depends on >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2069 and >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2072? >> >> It seems to be given the description of ZK-2063... >> >> Regards >> Luciano &

Re: Status: Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1

What are the votes you're counting? I thought that myself, Raul, and Pat had voted +1. The three of us are PMC members. -Flavio > On 19 Jul 2016, at 21:41, Chris Nauroth wrote: > > I'm back. Thanks to everyone who kept testing and voting while I was out. > > At this point, the tally is: > >

Re: Please add your release data for 'zookeeper'

Doing it now... -Flavio > On 20 Jul 2016, at 10:54, Chris Nauroth wrote: > > PMC members, would one of you please help me with this part of the release > process, since I am not a PMC member? Thank you. > > --Chris Nauroth > > > > > On 7/20/16, 10:13 AM, "Apache Reporter Service" > wrote

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache ZooKeeper 3.5.2-alpha

Thanks everyone for the push to get 3.5.2-alpha out, and specially to Chris for being the release manager. -Flavio > On 21 Jul 2016, at 13:08, Chris Nauroth wrote: > > The Apache ZooKeeper team is proud to announce Apache ZooKeeper version > 3.5.2-alpha. > > ZooKeeper is a high-performance c

Re: CHANGES.txt inconsistency

> On 21 Jul 2016, at 23:59, Chris Nauroth wrote: > > While working on the 3.5.2-alpha release, I noticed that CHANGES.txt in trunk > is not completely synchronized with the 3.5 release line. In branch-3.5, we > have sections for releases 3.5.0, 3.5.1 and 3.5.2 (added by me), each > indicatin

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >