You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@storm.apache.org by Tyson Norris <tn...@adobe.com> on 2015/04/21 18:58:53 UTC
Re: Storm Release Branches
Hi -
Related to releases, would it be possible to pick this commit into the 0.9.x branch for the next release, assuming there will be a 0.9.5 before 0.10?
It is a change to use a separate logback config for workers, hopefully minor, depending on how much you have customized the logback config.
Thanks
Tyson
> On Mar 23, 2015, at 7:55 AM, Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID> wrote:
>
> Sure that is fine with me.
> - Bobby
>
>
>
> On Friday, March 20, 2015 5:02 PM, Derek Dagit <de...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
>
>
>> lets create a HA feature branch that is not tied to a release number.
> I agree. This still has the other benefits.
> --
> Derek
>
> From: Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID>
> To: "dev@storm.apache.org" <de...@storm.apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 4:44 PM
> Subject: Re: Storm Release Branches
>
> I don't really like this plan.0.9.x 0.10.x both sound great.
> But if we call HA 0.11.x what version do we put on master? If it is 0.12 it implies that 0.11 was released, even just as a preview, with HA and 0.12 is potentially a regression because there is no HA yet. If it is 0.11 then that is just really confusing.
>
> If we are going to have a 0.10 branch that we will continue to be supported for stability, lets just merge HA into master.
>
> If we think HA is going to take longer to stabilize than the 0.11 time frame then lets create a HA feature branch that is not tied to a release number. I personally don't think it will take that long to stabilize HA.
> - Bobby
>
>
>
>
>
> On Friday, March 20, 2015 4:29 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <pt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> In order to allow work to continue on the master branch while we move closer to a 0.10.0 release, I’ve created the following branches:
>
> 0.9.x-branch (maintenance branch)
> * Should be inactive unless important fixes are discovered.
> * Changes should be cherry-picked from master unless specific to 0.9.x
>
> 0.10.x-branch (security branch)
> * Active branch for 0.10.0 release.
> * Changes should be cherry-picked from master to be included in the release (e.g. STORM-714, STORM-617)
>
> 0.11.x-branch (Nimbus HA branch)
> * Should be up merged to master when master changes.
>
>
> I’m not very excited about having to keep 0.11.x in sync with master, but I think the Nimbus HA work needs as many eyes and as much testing as possible. Having a dedicated branch will make it easier to create preview releases and allow users to kick the tires. It will also ease some of the burden on Parth who’s spent a lot of time keeping that work upmerged.
>
> If anyone has any questions, concerns or suggestions regarding branch/release management, let me know.
>
> -Taylor
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Storm Release Branches
Posted by Tyson Norris <tn...@adobe.com>.
Oops, mean to link the commit: https://github.com/apache/storm/commit/af61cca75c6215d5a0db2d6fb338deca03e55095
Ok, I can create a separate issue to pull to 0.9.x
Thanks
Tyson
On Apr 21, 2015, at 10:16 AM, Derek Dagit <de...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID>> wrote:
Is STORM-485 the one you are referring to?
Maybe create a JIRA Issue to pull it into 0.9.x branch and we can take a look.
--
Derek
----- Original Message -----
From: Tyson Norris <tn...@adobe.com>>
To: "dev@storm.apache.org<ma...@storm.apache.org>" <de...@storm.apache.org>>; Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com>>
Cc: Derek Dagit <de...@yahoo-inc.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2015 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: Storm Release Branches
Hi -
Related to releases, would it be possible to pick this commit into the 0.9.x branch for the next release, assuming there will be a 0.9.5 before 0.10?
It is a change to use a separate logback config for workers, hopefully minor, depending on how much you have customized the logback config.
Thanks
Tyson
On Mar 23, 2015, at 7:55 AM, Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID>> wrote:
Sure that is fine with me.
- Bobby
On Friday, March 20, 2015 5:02 PM, Derek Dagit <de...@yahoo-inc.com>> wrote:
lets create a HA feature branch that is not tied to a release number.
I agree. This still has the other benefits.
--
Derek
From: Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID>>
To: "dev@storm.apache.org<ma...@storm.apache.org>" <de...@storm.apache.org>>
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 4:44 PM
Subject: Re: Storm Release Branches
I don't really like this plan.0.9.x 0.10.x both sound great.
But if we call HA 0.11.x what version do we put on master? If it is 0.12 it implies that 0.11 was released, even just as a preview, with HA and 0.12 is potentially a regression because there is no HA yet. If it is 0.11 then that is just really confusing.
If we are going to have a 0.10 branch that we will continue to be supported for stability, lets just merge HA into master.
If we think HA is going to take longer to stabilize than the 0.11 time frame then lets create a HA feature branch that is not tied to a release number. I personally don't think it will take that long to stabilize HA.
- Bobby
On Friday, March 20, 2015 4:29 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <pt...@gmail.com>> wrote:
In order to allow work to continue on the master branch while we move closer to a 0.10.0 release, I’ve created the following branches:
0.9.x-branch (maintenance branch)
* Should be inactive unless important fixes are discovered.
* Changes should be cherry-picked from master unless specific to 0.9.x
0.10.x-branch (security branch)
* Active branch for 0.10.0 release.
* Changes should be cherry-picked from master to be included in the release (e.g. STORM-714, STORM-617)
0.11.x-branch (Nimbus HA branch)
* Should be up merged to master when master changes.
I’m not very excited about having to keep 0.11.x in sync with master, but I think the Nimbus HA work needs as many eyes and as much testing as possible. Having a dedicated branch will make it easier to create preview releases and allow users to kick the tires. It will also ease some of the burden on Parth who’s spent a lot of time keeping that work upmerged.
If anyone has any questions, concerns or suggestions regarding branch/release management, let me know.
-Taylor
Re: Storm Release Branches
Posted by Derek Dagit <de...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID>.
Is STORM-485 the one you are referring to?
Maybe create a JIRA Issue to pull it into 0.9.x branch and we can take a look.
--
Derek
----- Original Message -----
From: Tyson Norris <tn...@adobe.com>
To: "dev@storm.apache.org" <de...@storm.apache.org>; Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com>
Cc: Derek Dagit <de...@yahoo-inc.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2015 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: Storm Release Branches
Hi -
Related to releases, would it be possible to pick this commit into the 0.9.x branch for the next release, assuming there will be a 0.9.5 before 0.10?
It is a change to use a separate logback config for workers, hopefully minor, depending on how much you have customized the logback config.
Thanks
Tyson
> On Mar 23, 2015, at 7:55 AM, Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID> wrote:
>
> Sure that is fine with me.
> - Bobby
>
>
>
> On Friday, March 20, 2015 5:02 PM, Derek Dagit <de...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
>
>
>> lets create a HA feature branch that is not tied to a release number.
> I agree. This still has the other benefits.
> --
> Derek
>
> From: Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID>
> To: "dev@storm.apache.org" <de...@storm.apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 4:44 PM
> Subject: Re: Storm Release Branches
>
> I don't really like this plan.0.9.x 0.10.x both sound great.
> But if we call HA 0.11.x what version do we put on master? If it is 0.12 it implies that 0.11 was released, even just as a preview, with HA and 0.12 is potentially a regression because there is no HA yet. If it is 0.11 then that is just really confusing.
>
> If we are going to have a 0.10 branch that we will continue to be supported for stability, lets just merge HA into master.
>
> If we think HA is going to take longer to stabilize than the 0.11 time frame then lets create a HA feature branch that is not tied to a release number. I personally don't think it will take that long to stabilize HA.
> - Bobby
>
>
>
>
>
> On Friday, March 20, 2015 4:29 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <pt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> In order to allow work to continue on the master branch while we move closer to a 0.10.0 release, I’ve created the following branches:
>
> 0.9.x-branch (maintenance branch)
> * Should be inactive unless important fixes are discovered.
> * Changes should be cherry-picked from master unless specific to 0.9.x
>
> 0.10.x-branch (security branch)
> * Active branch for 0.10.0 release.
> * Changes should be cherry-picked from master to be included in the release (e.g. STORM-714, STORM-617)
>
> 0.11.x-branch (Nimbus HA branch)
> * Should be up merged to master when master changes.
>
>
> I’m not very excited about having to keep 0.11.x in sync with master, but I think the Nimbus HA work needs as many eyes and as much testing as possible. Having a dedicated branch will make it easier to create preview releases and allow users to kick the tires. It will also ease some of the burden on Parth who’s spent a lot of time keeping that work upmerged.
>
> If anyone has any questions, concerns or suggestions regarding branch/release management, let me know.
>
> -Taylor
>
>
>
>
>
>