You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@distributedlog.apache.org by Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> on 2016/11/09 07:08:19 UTC
[DISCUSSION] First Release
I'd like to start the discussion about the first release. There are still a
few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need to pick up a
few items and cut the first release and then iterate from there. Here is a
list of items that I think we should include:
- DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>: Repackaging namespace
to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
- DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support scala 2.10
and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
- DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move DL to depend on
central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift version, which
is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request out.
I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the official bookkeeper
version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new release once
that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure between DL and
BK.
Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be included in
the first release.
Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager for first
release?
- Sijie
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Gerrit Sundaram <ge...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:02 PM, Leigh Stewart <lstewart@twitter.com.invalid
> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <fr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 especially on DL-23.
> > >
> > > - Xi
> > >
> > > On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <
> khurrumnasimm@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > >
> > > > I am also interested in participating.
> > > >
> > > > - kn
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I'd like to start the discussion about the first release. There are
> > > > still a
> > > > > few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need to
> > pick
> > > > up a
> > > > > few items and cut the first release and then iterate from there.
> Here
> > > is
> > > > a
> > > > > list of items that I think we should include:
> > > > >
> > > > > - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>: Repackaging
> > > > namespace
> > > > > to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
> > > > > - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support
> scala
> > > > 2.10
> > > > > and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
> > > > > - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move DL to
> > > depend
> > > > > on
> > > > > central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift
> version,
> > > > which
> > > > > is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request out.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
> > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the official
> > > > > bookkeeper
> > > > > version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new
> release
> > > once
> > > > > that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure between
> DL
> > > and
> > > > > BK.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be
> > > included
> > > > in
> > > > > the first release.
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager for
> > first
> > > > > release?
> > > > >
> > > > > - Sijie
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -franck
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>.
cool! Thank you so much for rebasing this.
- Sijie
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 6:20 PM, liang xie <xi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The conflicted DL-167 change has been rebased, please help to review :)
>
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:53 AM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> > FYI. I merged the repackage script and repackage the namespace under
> > org.apache.distributedlog. All the changes for 0.4.0 are merged (except
> one
> > test case change - waiting for Liang's response). Ready to cut the first
> > release candidate.
> >
> > - Sijie
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 8:40 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> I've merged all the pull requests that need to be included in 0.4.0 (and
> >> both Jenkins and CI builds are green now). Also I moved inactive jiras
> to
> >> 0.5.0.
> >>
> >> There are a few issues remaining - https://issues.apache.org/
> >> jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20DL%20AND%20resolution%20%
> >> 3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.4.0%
> >> 20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC
> >>
> >> Most of them already have pull requests (but need to be rebased to
> latest
> >> master). So I can merge them.
> >>
> >> Hopefully I will be able to cut 0.4.0 release in following few days.
> >>
> >> - Sijie
> >>
> >> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I will start check the jiras that need to be included in 0.4.0 release
> at
> >>> the weekend. If there is any jiras that need to be included in 0.4.0,
> >>> please comment in the jira.
> >>>
> >>> - Sijie
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> FYI.
> >>>>
> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-81 is created for tracking
> >>>> building the process.
> >>>>
> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13024 and
> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13023 for setting the
> dists
> >>>> for DL.
> >>>>
> >>>> - Sijie
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Thank you for all the feedbacks. I will drive the release for this
> >>>>> version. So that we can have all the procedures documented in the
> wiki.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I created the wiki page here for documenting the procedure:
> >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DL/Pr
> >>>>> eparing+DistributedLog+Releases
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - Sijie
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Jia Zhai <zh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> +1
> >>>>>> Great to know the commitment of merge twitter's branch. Looking
> >>>>>> forward to
> >>>>>> see bookkeeper 4.5.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > It does make sense, Sijie, thanks for the update.
> >>>>>> >
> >>>>>> > -Flavio
> >>>>>> >
> >>>>>> > > On 17 Nov 2016, at 05:12, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> > >
> >>>>>> > > Flavio,
> >>>>>> > >
> >>>>>> > > I totally agreed that not using an official Apache version is
> not
> >>>>>> great
> >>>>>> > > for the community. We had a bookkeeper meetup last night. We've
> >>>>>> discussed
> >>>>>> > > the current situation with the community. We came to a
> commitment
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>> > merge
> >>>>>> > > Twitter's branch back into bookkeeper 4.5. After that we won't
> >>>>>> maintain
> >>>>>> > our
> >>>>>> > > own branch and switch to 4.5.
> >>>>>> > >
> >>>>>> > > Hope this make sense.
> >>>>>> > >
> >>>>>> > > Sijie
> >>>>>> > >
> >>>>>> > > On Nov 16, 2016 8:04 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> > >
> >>>>>> > > It isn't great that DistributedLog is not using the Apache
> >>>>>> BookKeeper
> >>>>>> > > release. Essentially anyone using DistributedLog today needs to
> >>>>>> use the
> >>>>>> > > Twitter branch of BookKeeper, which has diverged from Apache
> >>>>>> BookKeeper.
> >>>>>> > > I'm sure the changes in the Twitter branch are all great, but
> I'd
> >>>>>> be more
> >>>>>> > > comfortable being able to rely on the Apache BookKeeper
> releases,
> >>>>>> which
> >>>>>> > are
> >>>>>> > > community driven.
> >>>>>> > >
> >>>>>> > > I'm not going to block the release on this alone because it is
> >>>>>> important
> >>>>>> > > for this project to get a first release out soon, but we need to
> >>>>>> fix
> >>>>>> > DL-2.
> >>>>>> > >
> >>>>>> > > -Flavio
> >>>>>> > >
> >>>>>> > >> On 15 Nov 2016, at 19:02, Leigh Stewart
> >>>>>> <ls...@twitter.com.INVALID>
> >>>>>> > > wrote:
> >>>>>> > >>
> >>>>>> > >> +1
> >>>>>> > >>
> >>>>>> > >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <
> >>>>>> franck.cuny@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> > > wrote:
> >>>>>> > >>
> >>>>>> > >>> +1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
> >>>>>> > >>>
> >>>>>> > >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi.liu.ant@gmail.com
> >
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> > >>>
> >>>>>> > >>>> +1 especially on DL-23.
> >>>>>> > >>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>> - Xi
> >>>>>> > >>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <
> >>>>>> > khurrumnasimm@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> > >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> > >>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>>> +1 (non-binding)
> >>>>>> > >>>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>>> I am also interested in participating.
> >>>>>> > >>>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>>> - kn
> >>>>>> > >>>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <
> sijie@apache.org>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> > >>>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'd like to start the discussion about the first release.
> >>>>>> There are
> >>>>>> > >>>>> still a
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we
> >>>>>> need to
> >>>>>> > >>> pick
> >>>>>> > >>>>> up a
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> few items and cut the first release and then iterate from
> >>>>>> there.
> >>>>>> > Here
> >>>>>> > >>>> is
> >>>>>> > >>>>> a
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> list of items that I think we should include:
> >>>>>> > >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>:
> >>>>>> Repackaging
> >>>>>> > >>>>> namespace
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>:
> >>>>>> support
> >>>>>> > scala
> >>>>>> > >>>>> 2.10
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>:
> Move
> >>>>>> DL to
> >>>>>> > >>>> depend
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> on
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift
> >>>>>> version,
> >>>>>> > >>>>> which
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull
> >>>>>> request out.
> >>>>>> > >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the
> >>>>>> official
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> bookkeeper
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a
> new
> >>>>>> release
> >>>>>> > >>>> once
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure
> >>>>>> between
> >>>>>> > DL
> >>>>>> > >>>> and
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> BK.
> >>>>>> > >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it
> should
> >>>>>> be
> >>>>>> > >>>> included
> >>>>>> > >>>>> in
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> the first release.
> >>>>>> > >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> Also, is there anyone interested in being the release
> manager
> >>>>>> for
> >>>>>> > >>> first
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> release?
> >>>>>> > >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>>>> - Sijie
> >>>>>> > >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>>
> >>>>>> > >>>
> >>>>>> > >>>
> >>>>>> > >>>
> >>>>>> > >>> --
> >>>>>> > >>> -franck
> >>>>>> > >>>
> >>>>>> >
> >>>>>> >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by liang xie <xi...@gmail.com>.
The conflicted DL-167 change has been rebased, please help to review :)
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:53 AM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> FYI. I merged the repackage script and repackage the namespace under
> org.apache.distributedlog. All the changes for 0.4.0 are merged (except one
> test case change - waiting for Liang's response). Ready to cut the first
> release candidate.
>
> - Sijie
>
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 8:40 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I've merged all the pull requests that need to be included in 0.4.0 (and
>> both Jenkins and CI builds are green now). Also I moved inactive jiras to
>> 0.5.0.
>>
>> There are a few issues remaining - https://issues.apache.org/
>> jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20DL%20AND%20resolution%20%
>> 3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.4.0%
>> 20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC
>>
>> Most of them already have pull requests (but need to be rebased to latest
>> master). So I can merge them.
>>
>> Hopefully I will be able to cut 0.4.0 release in following few days.
>>
>> - Sijie
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I will start check the jiras that need to be included in 0.4.0 release at
>>> the weekend. If there is any jiras that need to be included in 0.4.0,
>>> please comment in the jira.
>>>
>>> - Sijie
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> FYI.
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-81 is created for tracking
>>>> building the process.
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13024 and
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13023 for setting the dists
>>>> for DL.
>>>>
>>>> - Sijie
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for all the feedbacks. I will drive the release for this
>>>>> version. So that we can have all the procedures documented in the wiki.
>>>>>
>>>>> I created the wiki page here for documenting the procedure:
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DL/Pr
>>>>> eparing+DistributedLog+Releases
>>>>>
>>>>> - Sijie
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Jia Zhai <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>> Great to know the commitment of merge twitter's branch. Looking
>>>>>> forward to
>>>>>> see bookkeeper 4.5.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > It does make sense, Sijie, thanks for the update.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > -Flavio
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > > On 17 Nov 2016, at 05:12, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > Flavio,
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > I totally agreed that not using an official Apache version is not
>>>>>> great
>>>>>> > > for the community. We had a bookkeeper meetup last night. We've
>>>>>> discussed
>>>>>> > > the current situation with the community. We came to a commitment
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> > merge
>>>>>> > > Twitter's branch back into bookkeeper 4.5. After that we won't
>>>>>> maintain
>>>>>> > our
>>>>>> > > own branch and switch to 4.5.
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > Hope this make sense.
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > Sijie
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > On Nov 16, 2016 8:04 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > It isn't great that DistributedLog is not using the Apache
>>>>>> BookKeeper
>>>>>> > > release. Essentially anyone using DistributedLog today needs to
>>>>>> use the
>>>>>> > > Twitter branch of BookKeeper, which has diverged from Apache
>>>>>> BookKeeper.
>>>>>> > > I'm sure the changes in the Twitter branch are all great, but I'd
>>>>>> be more
>>>>>> > > comfortable being able to rely on the Apache BookKeeper releases,
>>>>>> which
>>>>>> > are
>>>>>> > > community driven.
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > I'm not going to block the release on this alone because it is
>>>>>> important
>>>>>> > > for this project to get a first release out soon, but we need to
>>>>>> fix
>>>>>> > DL-2.
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > -Flavio
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > >> On 15 Nov 2016, at 19:02, Leigh Stewart
>>>>>> <ls...@twitter.com.INVALID>
>>>>>> > > wrote:
>>>>>> > >>
>>>>>> > >> +1
>>>>>> > >>
>>>>>> > >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <
>>>>>> franck.cuny@gmail.com>
>>>>>> > > wrote:
>>>>>> > >>
>>>>>> > >>> +1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> > >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> > >>>> +1 especially on DL-23.
>>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>>> > >>>> - Xi
>>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>>> > >>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <
>>>>>> > khurrumnasimm@gmail.com>
>>>>>> > >>>> wrote:
>>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>>> > >>>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>>> > >>>>> I am also interested in participating.
>>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>>> > >>>>> - kn
>>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>>> > >>>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>>> > >>>>>> I'd like to start the discussion about the first release.
>>>>>> There are
>>>>>> > >>>>> still a
>>>>>> > >>>>>> few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we
>>>>>> need to
>>>>>> > >>> pick
>>>>>> > >>>>> up a
>>>>>> > >>>>>> few items and cut the first release and then iterate from
>>>>>> there.
>>>>>> > Here
>>>>>> > >>>> is
>>>>>> > >>>>> a
>>>>>> > >>>>>> list of items that I think we should include:
>>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>:
>>>>>> Repackaging
>>>>>> > >>>>> namespace
>>>>>> > >>>>>> to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
>>>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>:
>>>>>> support
>>>>>> > scala
>>>>>> > >>>>> 2.10
>>>>>> > >>>>>> and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
>>>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move
>>>>>> DL to
>>>>>> > >>>> depend
>>>>>> > >>>>>> on
>>>>>> > >>>>>> central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift
>>>>>> version,
>>>>>> > >>>>> which
>>>>>> > >>>>>> is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull
>>>>>> request out.
>>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>>> > >>>>>> I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
>>>>>> > >>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the
>>>>>> official
>>>>>> > >>>>>> bookkeeper
>>>>>> > >>>>>> version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new
>>>>>> release
>>>>>> > >>>> once
>>>>>> > >>>>>> that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure
>>>>>> between
>>>>>> > DL
>>>>>> > >>>> and
>>>>>> > >>>>>> BK.
>>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>>> > >>>>>> Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> > >>>> included
>>>>>> > >>>>> in
>>>>>> > >>>>>> the first release.
>>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>>> > >>>>>> Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> > >>> first
>>>>>> > >>>>>> release?
>>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>>> > >>>>>> - Sijie
>>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> > >>> --
>>>>>> > >>> -franck
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>.
FYI. I merged the repackage script and repackage the namespace under
org.apache.distributedlog. All the changes for 0.4.0 are merged (except one
test case change - waiting for Liang's response). Ready to cut the first
release candidate.
- Sijie
On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 8:40 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> I've merged all the pull requests that need to be included in 0.4.0 (and
> both Jenkins and CI builds are green now). Also I moved inactive jiras to
> 0.5.0.
>
> There are a few issues remaining - https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20DL%20AND%20resolution%20%
> 3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.4.0%
> 20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC
>
> Most of them already have pull requests (but need to be rebased to latest
> master). So I can merge them.
>
> Hopefully I will be able to cut 0.4.0 release in following few days.
>
> - Sijie
>
> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I will start check the jiras that need to be included in 0.4.0 release at
>> the weekend. If there is any jiras that need to be included in 0.4.0,
>> please comment in the jira.
>>
>> - Sijie
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> FYI.
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-81 is created for tracking
>>> building the process.
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13024 and
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13023 for setting the dists
>>> for DL.
>>>
>>> - Sijie
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thank you for all the feedbacks. I will drive the release for this
>>>> version. So that we can have all the procedures documented in the wiki.
>>>>
>>>> I created the wiki page here for documenting the procedure:
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DL/Pr
>>>> eparing+DistributedLog+Releases
>>>>
>>>> - Sijie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Jia Zhai <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>> Great to know the commitment of merge twitter's branch. Looking
>>>>> forward to
>>>>> see bookkeeper 4.5.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > It does make sense, Sijie, thanks for the update.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > -Flavio
>>>>> >
>>>>> > > On 17 Nov 2016, at 05:12, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Flavio,
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > I totally agreed that not using an official Apache version is not
>>>>> great
>>>>> > > for the community. We had a bookkeeper meetup last night. We've
>>>>> discussed
>>>>> > > the current situation with the community. We came to a commitment
>>>>> to
>>>>> > merge
>>>>> > > Twitter's branch back into bookkeeper 4.5. After that we won't
>>>>> maintain
>>>>> > our
>>>>> > > own branch and switch to 4.5.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Hope this make sense.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Sijie
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > On Nov 16, 2016 8:04 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > It isn't great that DistributedLog is not using the Apache
>>>>> BookKeeper
>>>>> > > release. Essentially anyone using DistributedLog today needs to
>>>>> use the
>>>>> > > Twitter branch of BookKeeper, which has diverged from Apache
>>>>> BookKeeper.
>>>>> > > I'm sure the changes in the Twitter branch are all great, but I'd
>>>>> be more
>>>>> > > comfortable being able to rely on the Apache BookKeeper releases,
>>>>> which
>>>>> > are
>>>>> > > community driven.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > I'm not going to block the release on this alone because it is
>>>>> important
>>>>> > > for this project to get a first release out soon, but we need to
>>>>> fix
>>>>> > DL-2.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > -Flavio
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >> On 15 Nov 2016, at 19:02, Leigh Stewart
>>>>> <ls...@twitter.com.INVALID>
>>>>> > > wrote:
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >> +1
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <
>>>>> franck.cuny@gmail.com>
>>>>> > > wrote:
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >>> +1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
>>>>> > >>>
>>>>> > >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > >>>
>>>>> > >>>> +1 especially on DL-23.
>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>> > >>>> - Xi
>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>> > >>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <
>>>>> > khurrumnasimm@gmail.com>
>>>>> > >>>> wrote:
>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>> > >>>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>> > >>>>> I am also interested in participating.
>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>> > >>>>> - kn
>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>> > >>>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>> > >>>>>> I'd like to start the discussion about the first release.
>>>>> There are
>>>>> > >>>>> still a
>>>>> > >>>>>> few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we
>>>>> need to
>>>>> > >>> pick
>>>>> > >>>>> up a
>>>>> > >>>>>> few items and cut the first release and then iterate from
>>>>> there.
>>>>> > Here
>>>>> > >>>> is
>>>>> > >>>>> a
>>>>> > >>>>>> list of items that I think we should include:
>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>:
>>>>> Repackaging
>>>>> > >>>>> namespace
>>>>> > >>>>>> to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
>>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>:
>>>>> support
>>>>> > scala
>>>>> > >>>>> 2.10
>>>>> > >>>>>> and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
>>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move
>>>>> DL to
>>>>> > >>>> depend
>>>>> > >>>>>> on
>>>>> > >>>>>> central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift
>>>>> version,
>>>>> > >>>>> which
>>>>> > >>>>>> is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull
>>>>> request out.
>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>> > >>>>>> I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
>>>>> > >>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the
>>>>> official
>>>>> > >>>>>> bookkeeper
>>>>> > >>>>>> version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new
>>>>> release
>>>>> > >>>> once
>>>>> > >>>>>> that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure
>>>>> between
>>>>> > DL
>>>>> > >>>> and
>>>>> > >>>>>> BK.
>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>> > >>>>>> Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should
>>>>> be
>>>>> > >>>> included
>>>>> > >>>>> in
>>>>> > >>>>>> the first release.
>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>> > >>>>>> Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager
>>>>> for
>>>>> > >>> first
>>>>> > >>>>>> release?
>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>> > >>>>>> - Sijie
>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>> > >>>
>>>>> > >>>
>>>>> > >>>
>>>>> > >>> --
>>>>> > >>> -franck
>>>>> > >>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Leigh Stewart <ls...@twitter.com.INVALID>.
Nice work, thanks for doing this.
On Dec 29, 2016 8:41 PM, "Sijie Guo" <si...@apache.org> wrote:
I've merged all the pull requests that need to be included in 0.4.0 (and
both Jenkins and CI builds are green now). Also I moved inactive jiras to
0.5.0.
There are a few issues remaining -
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%
20DL%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20fixVersio
n%20%3D%200.4.0%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC
Most of them already have pull requests (but need to be rebased to latest
master). So I can merge them.
Hopefully I will be able to cut 0.4.0 release in following few days.
- Sijie
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> I will start check the jiras that need to be included in 0.4.0 release at
> the weekend. If there is any jiras that need to be included in 0.4.0,
> please comment in the jira.
>
> - Sijie
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> FYI.
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-81 is created for tracking
>> building the process.
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13024 and
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13023 for setting the dists
>> for DL.
>>
>> - Sijie
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you for all the feedbacks. I will drive the release for this
>>> version. So that we can have all the procedures documented in the wiki.
>>>
>>> I created the wiki page here for documenting the procedure:
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DL/Pr
>>> eparing+DistributedLog+Releases
>>>
>>> - Sijie
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Jia Zhai <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>> Great to know the commitment of merge twitter's branch. Looking forward
>>>> to
>>>> see bookkeeper 4.5.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > It does make sense, Sijie, thanks for the update.
>>>> >
>>>> > -Flavio
>>>> >
>>>> > > On 17 Nov 2016, at 05:12, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Flavio,
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I totally agreed that not using an official Apache version is not
>>>> great
>>>> > > for the community. We had a bookkeeper meetup last night. We've
>>>> discussed
>>>> > > the current situation with the community. We came to a commitment
to
>>>> > merge
>>>> > > Twitter's branch back into bookkeeper 4.5. After that we won't
>>>> maintain
>>>> > our
>>>> > > own branch and switch to 4.5.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Hope this make sense.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Sijie
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Nov 16, 2016 8:04 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > It isn't great that DistributedLog is not using the Apache
>>>> BookKeeper
>>>> > > release. Essentially anyone using DistributedLog today needs to use
>>>> the
>>>> > > Twitter branch of BookKeeper, which has diverged from Apache
>>>> BookKeeper.
>>>> > > I'm sure the changes in the Twitter branch are all great, but I'd
>>>> be more
>>>> > > comfortable being able to rely on the Apache BookKeeper releases,
>>>> which
>>>> > are
>>>> > > community driven.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I'm not going to block the release on this alone because it is
>>>> important
>>>> > > for this project to get a first release out soon, but we need to
fix
>>>> > DL-2.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > -Flavio
>>>> > >
>>>> > >> On 15 Nov 2016, at 19:02, Leigh Stewart
>>>> <ls...@twitter.com.INVALID>
>>>> > > wrote:
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> +1
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <
>>>> franck.cuny@gmail.com>
>>>> > > wrote:
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >>> +1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>>> +1 especially on DL-23.
>>>> > >>>>
>>>> > >>>> - Xi
>>>> > >>>>
>>>> > >>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <
>>>> > khurrumnasimm@gmail.com>
>>>> > >>>> wrote:
>>>> > >>>>
>>>> > >>>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>>> I am also interested in participating.
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>>> - kn
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> I'd like to start the discussion about the first release.
>>>> There are
>>>> > >>>>> still a
>>>> > >>>>>> few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need
>>>> to
>>>> > >>> pick
>>>> > >>>>> up a
>>>> > >>>>>> few items and cut the first release and then iterate from
>>>> there.
>>>> > Here
>>>> > >>>> is
>>>> > >>>>> a
>>>> > >>>>>> list of items that I think we should include:
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>:
>>>> Repackaging
>>>> > >>>>> namespace
>>>> > >>>>>> to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support
>>>> > scala
>>>> > >>>>> 2.10
>>>> > >>>>>> and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move
>>>> DL to
>>>> > >>>> depend
>>>> > >>>>>> on
>>>> > >>>>>> central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift
>>>> version,
>>>> > >>>>> which
>>>> > >>>>>> is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request
>>>> out.
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
>>>> > >>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the
>>>> official
>>>> > >>>>>> bookkeeper
>>>> > >>>>>> version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new
>>>> release
>>>> > >>>> once
>>>> > >>>>>> that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure
>>>> between
>>>> > DL
>>>> > >>>> and
>>>> > >>>>>> BK.
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should
be
>>>> > >>>> included
>>>> > >>>>> in
>>>> > >>>>>> the first release.
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager
>>>> for
>>>> > >>> first
>>>> > >>>>>> release?
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> - Sijie
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>>
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>> --
>>>> > >>> -franck
>>>> > >>>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>.
I've merged all the pull requests that need to be included in 0.4.0 (and
both Jenkins and CI builds are green now). Also I moved inactive jiras to
0.5.0.
There are a few issues remaining -
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20DL%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.4.0%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC
Most of them already have pull requests (but need to be rebased to latest
master). So I can merge them.
Hopefully I will be able to cut 0.4.0 release in following few days.
- Sijie
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> I will start check the jiras that need to be included in 0.4.0 release at
> the weekend. If there is any jiras that need to be included in 0.4.0,
> please comment in the jira.
>
> - Sijie
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> FYI.
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-81 is created for tracking
>> building the process.
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13024 and
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13023 for setting the dists
>> for DL.
>>
>> - Sijie
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you for all the feedbacks. I will drive the release for this
>>> version. So that we can have all the procedures documented in the wiki.
>>>
>>> I created the wiki page here for documenting the procedure:
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DL/Pr
>>> eparing+DistributedLog+Releases
>>>
>>> - Sijie
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Jia Zhai <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>> Great to know the commitment of merge twitter's branch. Looking forward
>>>> to
>>>> see bookkeeper 4.5.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > It does make sense, Sijie, thanks for the update.
>>>> >
>>>> > -Flavio
>>>> >
>>>> > > On 17 Nov 2016, at 05:12, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Flavio,
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I totally agreed that not using an official Apache version is not
>>>> great
>>>> > > for the community. We had a bookkeeper meetup last night. We've
>>>> discussed
>>>> > > the current situation with the community. We came to a commitment to
>>>> > merge
>>>> > > Twitter's branch back into bookkeeper 4.5. After that we won't
>>>> maintain
>>>> > our
>>>> > > own branch and switch to 4.5.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Hope this make sense.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Sijie
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Nov 16, 2016 8:04 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > It isn't great that DistributedLog is not using the Apache
>>>> BookKeeper
>>>> > > release. Essentially anyone using DistributedLog today needs to use
>>>> the
>>>> > > Twitter branch of BookKeeper, which has diverged from Apache
>>>> BookKeeper.
>>>> > > I'm sure the changes in the Twitter branch are all great, but I'd
>>>> be more
>>>> > > comfortable being able to rely on the Apache BookKeeper releases,
>>>> which
>>>> > are
>>>> > > community driven.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I'm not going to block the release on this alone because it is
>>>> important
>>>> > > for this project to get a first release out soon, but we need to fix
>>>> > DL-2.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > -Flavio
>>>> > >
>>>> > >> On 15 Nov 2016, at 19:02, Leigh Stewart
>>>> <ls...@twitter.com.INVALID>
>>>> > > wrote:
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> +1
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <
>>>> franck.cuny@gmail.com>
>>>> > > wrote:
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >>> +1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>>> +1 especially on DL-23.
>>>> > >>>>
>>>> > >>>> - Xi
>>>> > >>>>
>>>> > >>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <
>>>> > khurrumnasimm@gmail.com>
>>>> > >>>> wrote:
>>>> > >>>>
>>>> > >>>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>>> I am also interested in participating.
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>>> - kn
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> I'd like to start the discussion about the first release.
>>>> There are
>>>> > >>>>> still a
>>>> > >>>>>> few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need
>>>> to
>>>> > >>> pick
>>>> > >>>>> up a
>>>> > >>>>>> few items and cut the first release and then iterate from
>>>> there.
>>>> > Here
>>>> > >>>> is
>>>> > >>>>> a
>>>> > >>>>>> list of items that I think we should include:
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>:
>>>> Repackaging
>>>> > >>>>> namespace
>>>> > >>>>>> to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support
>>>> > scala
>>>> > >>>>> 2.10
>>>> > >>>>>> and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
>>>> > >>>>>> - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move
>>>> DL to
>>>> > >>>> depend
>>>> > >>>>>> on
>>>> > >>>>>> central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift
>>>> version,
>>>> > >>>>> which
>>>> > >>>>>> is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request
>>>> out.
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
>>>> > >>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the
>>>> official
>>>> > >>>>>> bookkeeper
>>>> > >>>>>> version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new
>>>> release
>>>> > >>>> once
>>>> > >>>>>> that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure
>>>> between
>>>> > DL
>>>> > >>>> and
>>>> > >>>>>> BK.
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be
>>>> > >>>> included
>>>> > >>>>> in
>>>> > >>>>>> the first release.
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager
>>>> for
>>>> > >>> first
>>>> > >>>>>> release?
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> - Sijie
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>>
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>> --
>>>> > >>> -franck
>>>> > >>>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>.
I will start check the jiras that need to be included in 0.4.0 release at
the weekend. If there is any jiras that need to be included in 0.4.0,
please comment in the jira.
- Sijie
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> FYI.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-81 is created for tracking
> building the process.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13024 and
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13023 for setting the dists
> for DL.
>
> - Sijie
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Thank you for all the feedbacks. I will drive the release for this
>> version. So that we can have all the procedures documented in the wiki.
>>
>> I created the wiki page here for documenting the procedure:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DL/
>> Preparing+DistributedLog+Releases
>>
>> - Sijie
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Jia Zhai <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>> Great to know the commitment of merge twitter's branch. Looking forward
>>> to
>>> see bookkeeper 4.5.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > It does make sense, Sijie, thanks for the update.
>>> >
>>> > -Flavio
>>> >
>>> > > On 17 Nov 2016, at 05:12, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Flavio,
>>> > >
>>> > > I totally agreed that not using an official Apache version is not
>>> great
>>> > > for the community. We had a bookkeeper meetup last night. We've
>>> discussed
>>> > > the current situation with the community. We came to a commitment to
>>> > merge
>>> > > Twitter's branch back into bookkeeper 4.5. After that we won't
>>> maintain
>>> > our
>>> > > own branch and switch to 4.5.
>>> > >
>>> > > Hope this make sense.
>>> > >
>>> > > Sijie
>>> > >
>>> > > On Nov 16, 2016 8:04 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > It isn't great that DistributedLog is not using the Apache BookKeeper
>>> > > release. Essentially anyone using DistributedLog today needs to use
>>> the
>>> > > Twitter branch of BookKeeper, which has diverged from Apache
>>> BookKeeper.
>>> > > I'm sure the changes in the Twitter branch are all great, but I'd be
>>> more
>>> > > comfortable being able to rely on the Apache BookKeeper releases,
>>> which
>>> > are
>>> > > community driven.
>>> > >
>>> > > I'm not going to block the release on this alone because it is
>>> important
>>> > > for this project to get a first release out soon, but we need to fix
>>> > DL-2.
>>> > >
>>> > > -Flavio
>>> > >
>>> > >> On 15 Nov 2016, at 19:02, Leigh Stewart
>>> <ls...@twitter.com.INVALID>
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >>
>>> > >> +1
>>> > >>
>>> > >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <franck.cuny@gmail.com
>>> >
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >>
>>> > >>> +1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>> +1 especially on DL-23.
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> - Xi
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <
>>> > khurrumnasimm@gmail.com>
>>> > >>>> wrote:
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> I am also interested in participating.
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> - kn
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> I'd like to start the discussion about the first release. There
>>> are
>>> > >>>>> still a
>>> > >>>>>> few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need
>>> to
>>> > >>> pick
>>> > >>>>> up a
>>> > >>>>>> few items and cut the first release and then iterate from there.
>>> > Here
>>> > >>>> is
>>> > >>>>> a
>>> > >>>>>> list of items that I think we should include:
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>:
>>> Repackaging
>>> > >>>>> namespace
>>> > >>>>>> to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
>>> > >>>>>> - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support
>>> > scala
>>> > >>>>> 2.10
>>> > >>>>>> and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
>>> > >>>>>> - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move DL
>>> to
>>> > >>>> depend
>>> > >>>>>> on
>>> > >>>>>> central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift
>>> version,
>>> > >>>>> which
>>> > >>>>>> is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request
>>> out.
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
>>> > >>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the
>>> official
>>> > >>>>>> bookkeeper
>>> > >>>>>> version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new
>>> release
>>> > >>>> once
>>> > >>>>>> that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure
>>> between
>>> > DL
>>> > >>>> and
>>> > >>>>>> BK.
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be
>>> > >>>> included
>>> > >>>>> in
>>> > >>>>>> the first release.
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager
>>> for
>>> > >>> first
>>> > >>>>>> release?
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> - Sijie
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> --
>>> > >>> -franck
>>> > >>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>.
FYI.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-81 is created for tracking
building the process.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13024 and
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13023 for setting the dists for
DL.
- Sijie
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thank you for all the feedbacks. I will drive the release for this
> version. So that we can have all the procedures documented in the wiki.
>
> I created the wiki page here for documenting the procedure: https://cwiki.
> apache.org/confluence/display/DL/Preparing+DistributedLog+Releases
>
> - Sijie
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Jia Zhai <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1
>> Great to know the commitment of merge twitter's branch. Looking forward to
>> see bookkeeper 4.5.
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > It does make sense, Sijie, thanks for the update.
>> >
>> > -Flavio
>> >
>> > > On 17 Nov 2016, at 05:12, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Flavio,
>> > >
>> > > I totally agreed that not using an official Apache version is not
>> great
>> > > for the community. We had a bookkeeper meetup last night. We've
>> discussed
>> > > the current situation with the community. We came to a commitment to
>> > merge
>> > > Twitter's branch back into bookkeeper 4.5. After that we won't
>> maintain
>> > our
>> > > own branch and switch to 4.5.
>> > >
>> > > Hope this make sense.
>> > >
>> > > Sijie
>> > >
>> > > On Nov 16, 2016 8:04 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > It isn't great that DistributedLog is not using the Apache BookKeeper
>> > > release. Essentially anyone using DistributedLog today needs to use
>> the
>> > > Twitter branch of BookKeeper, which has diverged from Apache
>> BookKeeper.
>> > > I'm sure the changes in the Twitter branch are all great, but I'd be
>> more
>> > > comfortable being able to rely on the Apache BookKeeper releases,
>> which
>> > are
>> > > community driven.
>> > >
>> > > I'm not going to block the release on this alone because it is
>> important
>> > > for this project to get a first release out soon, but we need to fix
>> > DL-2.
>> > >
>> > > -Flavio
>> > >
>> > >> On 15 Nov 2016, at 19:02, Leigh Stewart <lstewart@twitter.com.INVALID
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> +1
>> > >>
>> > >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <fr...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> +1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> +1 especially on DL-23.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> - Xi
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <
>> > khurrumnasimm@gmail.com>
>> > >>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>> +1 (non-binding)
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> I am also interested in participating.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> - kn
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>> I'd like to start the discussion about the first release. There
>> are
>> > >>>>> still a
>> > >>>>>> few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need to
>> > >>> pick
>> > >>>>> up a
>> > >>>>>> few items and cut the first release and then iterate from there.
>> > Here
>> > >>>> is
>> > >>>>> a
>> > >>>>>> list of items that I think we should include:
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>: Repackaging
>> > >>>>> namespace
>> > >>>>>> to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
>> > >>>>>> - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support
>> > scala
>> > >>>>> 2.10
>> > >>>>>> and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
>> > >>>>>> - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move DL
>> to
>> > >>>> depend
>> > >>>>>> on
>> > >>>>>> central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift
>> version,
>> > >>>>> which
>> > >>>>>> is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request
>> out.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
>> > >>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the official
>> > >>>>>> bookkeeper
>> > >>>>>> version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new
>> release
>> > >>>> once
>> > >>>>>> that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure
>> between
>> > DL
>> > >>>> and
>> > >>>>>> BK.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be
>> > >>>> included
>> > >>>>> in
>> > >>>>>> the first release.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager for
>> > >>> first
>> > >>>>>> release?
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> - Sijie
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> --
>> > >>> -franck
>> > >>>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>.
Thank you for all the feedbacks. I will drive the release for this version.
So that we can have all the procedures documented in the wiki.
I created the wiki page here for documenting the procedure:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DL/Preparing+DistributedLog+Releases
- Sijie
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Jia Zhai <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
> Great to know the commitment of merge twitter's branch. Looking forward to
> see bookkeeper 4.5.
>
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > It does make sense, Sijie, thanks for the update.
> >
> > -Flavio
> >
> > > On 17 Nov 2016, at 05:12, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Flavio,
> > >
> > > I totally agreed that not using an official Apache version is not
> great
> > > for the community. We had a bookkeeper meetup last night. We've
> discussed
> > > the current situation with the community. We came to a commitment to
> > merge
> > > Twitter's branch back into bookkeeper 4.5. After that we won't maintain
> > our
> > > own branch and switch to 4.5.
> > >
> > > Hope this make sense.
> > >
> > > Sijie
> > >
> > > On Nov 16, 2016 8:04 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > It isn't great that DistributedLog is not using the Apache BookKeeper
> > > release. Essentially anyone using DistributedLog today needs to use the
> > > Twitter branch of BookKeeper, which has diverged from Apache
> BookKeeper.
> > > I'm sure the changes in the Twitter branch are all great, but I'd be
> more
> > > comfortable being able to rely on the Apache BookKeeper releases, which
> > are
> > > community driven.
> > >
> > > I'm not going to block the release on this alone because it is
> important
> > > for this project to get a first release out soon, but we need to fix
> > DL-2.
> > >
> > > -Flavio
> > >
> > >> On 15 Nov 2016, at 19:02, Leigh Stewart <lstewart@twitter.com.INVALID
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <fr...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> +1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
> > >>>
> > >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> +1 especially on DL-23.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> - Xi
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <
> > khurrumnasimm@gmail.com>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> +1 (non-binding)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I am also interested in participating.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - kn
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> I'd like to start the discussion about the first release. There
> are
> > >>>>> still a
> > >>>>>> few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need to
> > >>> pick
> > >>>>> up a
> > >>>>>> few items and cut the first release and then iterate from there.
> > Here
> > >>>> is
> > >>>>> a
> > >>>>>> list of items that I think we should include:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>: Repackaging
> > >>>>> namespace
> > >>>>>> to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
> > >>>>>> - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support
> > scala
> > >>>>> 2.10
> > >>>>>> and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
> > >>>>>> - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move DL to
> > >>>> depend
> > >>>>>> on
> > >>>>>> central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift
> version,
> > >>>>> which
> > >>>>>> is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request
> out.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
> > >>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the official
> > >>>>>> bookkeeper
> > >>>>>> version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new
> release
> > >>>> once
> > >>>>>> that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure between
> > DL
> > >>>> and
> > >>>>>> BK.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be
> > >>>> included
> > >>>>> in
> > >>>>>> the first release.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager for
> > >>> first
> > >>>>>> release?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> - Sijie
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> -franck
> > >>>
> >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Jia Zhai <zh...@gmail.com>.
+1
Great to know the commitment of merge twitter's branch. Looking forward to
see bookkeeper 4.5.
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
> It does make sense, Sijie, thanks for the update.
>
> -Flavio
>
> > On 17 Nov 2016, at 05:12, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Flavio,
> >
> > I totally agreed that not using an official Apache version is not great
> > for the community. We had a bookkeeper meetup last night. We've discussed
> > the current situation with the community. We came to a commitment to
> merge
> > Twitter's branch back into bookkeeper 4.5. After that we won't maintain
> our
> > own branch and switch to 4.5.
> >
> > Hope this make sense.
> >
> > Sijie
> >
> > On Nov 16, 2016 8:04 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > It isn't great that DistributedLog is not using the Apache BookKeeper
> > release. Essentially anyone using DistributedLog today needs to use the
> > Twitter branch of BookKeeper, which has diverged from Apache BookKeeper.
> > I'm sure the changes in the Twitter branch are all great, but I'd be more
> > comfortable being able to rely on the Apache BookKeeper releases, which
> are
> > community driven.
> >
> > I'm not going to block the release on this alone because it is important
> > for this project to get a first release out soon, but we need to fix
> DL-2.
> >
> > -Flavio
> >
> >> On 15 Nov 2016, at 19:02, Leigh Stewart <ls...@twitter.com.INVALID>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <fr...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> +1 especially on DL-23.
> >>>>
> >>>> - Xi
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <
> khurrumnasimm@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1 (non-binding)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I am also interested in participating.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - kn
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I'd like to start the discussion about the first release. There are
> >>>>> still a
> >>>>>> few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need to
> >>> pick
> >>>>> up a
> >>>>>> few items and cut the first release and then iterate from there.
> Here
> >>>> is
> >>>>> a
> >>>>>> list of items that I think we should include:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>: Repackaging
> >>>>> namespace
> >>>>>> to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
> >>>>>> - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support
> scala
> >>>>> 2.10
> >>>>>> and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
> >>>>>> - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move DL to
> >>>> depend
> >>>>>> on
> >>>>>> central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift version,
> >>>>> which
> >>>>>> is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request out.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
> >>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the official
> >>>>>> bookkeeper
> >>>>>> version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new release
> >>>> once
> >>>>>> that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure between
> DL
> >>>> and
> >>>>>> BK.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be
> >>>> included
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>> the first release.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager for
> >>> first
> >>>>>> release?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - Sijie
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> -franck
> >>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>.
It does make sense, Sijie, thanks for the update.
-Flavio
> On 17 Nov 2016, at 05:12, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Flavio,
>
> I totally agreed that not using an official Apache version is not great
> for the community. We had a bookkeeper meetup last night. We've discussed
> the current situation with the community. We came to a commitment to merge
> Twitter's branch back into bookkeeper 4.5. After that we won't maintain our
> own branch and switch to 4.5.
>
> Hope this make sense.
>
> Sijie
>
> On Nov 16, 2016 8:04 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> It isn't great that DistributedLog is not using the Apache BookKeeper
> release. Essentially anyone using DistributedLog today needs to use the
> Twitter branch of BookKeeper, which has diverged from Apache BookKeeper.
> I'm sure the changes in the Twitter branch are all great, but I'd be more
> comfortable being able to rely on the Apache BookKeeper releases, which are
> community driven.
>
> I'm not going to block the release on this alone because it is important
> for this project to get a first release out soon, but we need to fix DL-2.
>
> -Flavio
>
>> On 15 Nov 2016, at 19:02, Leigh Stewart <ls...@twitter.com.INVALID>
> wrote:
>>
>> +1
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <fr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 especially on DL-23.
>>>>
>>>> - Xi
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <kh...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>>>
>>>>> I am also interested in participating.
>>>>>
>>>>> - kn
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to start the discussion about the first release. There are
>>>>> still a
>>>>>> few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need to
>>> pick
>>>>> up a
>>>>>> few items and cut the first release and then iterate from there. Here
>>>> is
>>>>> a
>>>>>> list of items that I think we should include:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>: Repackaging
>>>>> namespace
>>>>>> to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
>>>>>> - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support scala
>>>>> 2.10
>>>>>> and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
>>>>>> - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move DL to
>>>> depend
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift version,
>>>>> which
>>>>>> is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the official
>>>>>> bookkeeper
>>>>>> version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new release
>>>> once
>>>>>> that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure between DL
>>>> and
>>>>>> BK.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be
>>>> included
>>>>> in
>>>>>> the first release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager for
>>> first
>>>>>> release?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Sijie
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> -franck
>>>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>.
Flavio,
I totally agreed that not using an official Apache version is not great
for the community. We had a bookkeeper meetup last night. We've discussed
the current situation with the community. We came to a commitment to merge
Twitter's branch back into bookkeeper 4.5. After that we won't maintain our
own branch and switch to 4.5.
Hope this make sense.
Sijie
On Nov 16, 2016 8:04 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
It isn't great that DistributedLog is not using the Apache BookKeeper
release. Essentially anyone using DistributedLog today needs to use the
Twitter branch of BookKeeper, which has diverged from Apache BookKeeper.
I'm sure the changes in the Twitter branch are all great, but I'd be more
comfortable being able to rely on the Apache BookKeeper releases, which are
community driven.
I'm not going to block the release on this alone because it is important
for this project to get a first release out soon, but we need to fix DL-2.
-Flavio
> On 15 Nov 2016, at 19:02, Leigh Stewart <ls...@twitter.com.INVALID>
wrote:
>
> +1
>
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <fr...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>> +1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 especially on DL-23.
>>>
>>> - Xi
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <kh...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>>
>>>> I am also interested in participating.
>>>>
>>>> - kn
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to start the discussion about the first release. There are
>>>> still a
>>>>> few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need to
>> pick
>>>> up a
>>>>> few items and cut the first release and then iterate from there. Here
>>> is
>>>> a
>>>>> list of items that I think we should include:
>>>>>
>>>>> - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>: Repackaging
>>>> namespace
>>>>> to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
>>>>> - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support scala
>>>> 2.10
>>>>> and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
>>>>> - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move DL to
>>> depend
>>>>> on
>>>>> central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift version,
>>>> which
>>>>> is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request out.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the official
>>>>> bookkeeper
>>>>> version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new release
>>> once
>>>>> that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure between DL
>>> and
>>>>> BK.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be
>>> included
>>>> in
>>>>> the first release.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager for
>> first
>>>>> release?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Sijie
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> -franck
>>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>.
It isn't great that DistributedLog is not using the Apache BookKeeper release. Essentially anyone using DistributedLog today needs to use the Twitter branch of BookKeeper, which has diverged from Apache BookKeeper. I'm sure the changes in the Twitter branch are all great, but I'd be more comfortable being able to rely on the Apache BookKeeper releases, which are community driven.
I'm not going to block the release on this alone because it is important for this project to get a first release out soon, but we need to fix DL-2.
-Flavio
> On 15 Nov 2016, at 19:02, Leigh Stewart <ls...@twitter.com.INVALID> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <fr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 especially on DL-23.
>>>
>>> - Xi
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <kh...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>>
>>>> I am also interested in participating.
>>>>
>>>> - kn
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to start the discussion about the first release. There are
>>>> still a
>>>>> few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need to
>> pick
>>>> up a
>>>>> few items and cut the first release and then iterate from there. Here
>>> is
>>>> a
>>>>> list of items that I think we should include:
>>>>>
>>>>> - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>: Repackaging
>>>> namespace
>>>>> to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
>>>>> - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support scala
>>>> 2.10
>>>>> and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
>>>>> - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move DL to
>>> depend
>>>>> on
>>>>> central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift version,
>>>> which
>>>>> is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request out.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the official
>>>>> bookkeeper
>>>>> version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new release
>>> once
>>>>> that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure between DL
>>> and
>>>>> BK.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be
>>> included
>>>> in
>>>>> the first release.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager for
>> first
>>>>> release?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Sijie
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> -franck
>>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Leigh Stewart <ls...@twitter.com.INVALID>.
+1
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <fr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
>
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1 especially on DL-23.
> >
> > - Xi
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <kh...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non-binding)
> > >
> > > I am also interested in participating.
> > >
> > > - kn
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'd like to start the discussion about the first release. There are
> > > still a
> > > > few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need to
> pick
> > > up a
> > > > few items and cut the first release and then iterate from there. Here
> > is
> > > a
> > > > list of items that I think we should include:
> > > >
> > > > - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>: Repackaging
> > > namespace
> > > > to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
> > > > - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support scala
> > > 2.10
> > > > and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
> > > > - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move DL to
> > depend
> > > > on
> > > > central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift version,
> > > which
> > > > is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request out.
> > > >
> > > > I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the official
> > > > bookkeeper
> > > > version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new release
> > once
> > > > that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure between DL
> > and
> > > > BK.
> > > >
> > > > Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be
> > included
> > > in
> > > > the first release.
> > > >
> > > > Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager for
> first
> > > > release?
> > > >
> > > > - Sijie
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> -franck
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Franck Cuny <fr...@gmail.com>.
+1 and I agree to not make DL-2 a blocker.
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 especially on DL-23.
>
> - Xi
>
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <kh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > I am also interested in participating.
> >
> > - kn
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I'd like to start the discussion about the first release. There are
> > still a
> > > few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need to pick
> > up a
> > > few items and cut the first release and then iterate from there. Here
> is
> > a
> > > list of items that I think we should include:
> > >
> > > - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>: Repackaging
> > namespace
> > > to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
> > > - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support scala
> > 2.10
> > > and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
> > > - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move DL to
> depend
> > > on
> > > central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift version,
> > which
> > > is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request out.
> > >
> > > I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the official
> > > bookkeeper
> > > version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new release
> once
> > > that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure between DL
> and
> > > BK.
> > >
> > > Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be
> included
> > in
> > > the first release.
> > >
> > > Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager for first
> > > release?
> > >
> > > - Sijie
> > >
> >
>
--
-franck
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Xi Liu <xi...@gmail.com>.
+1 especially on DL-23.
- Xi
On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim <kh...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> I am also interested in participating.
>
> - kn
>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I'd like to start the discussion about the first release. There are
> still a
> > few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need to pick
> up a
> > few items and cut the first release and then iterate from there. Here is
> a
> > list of items that I think we should include:
> >
> > - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>: Repackaging
> namespace
> > to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
> > - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support scala
> 2.10
> > and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
> > - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move DL to depend
> > on
> > central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift version,
> which
> > is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request out.
> >
> > I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the official
> > bookkeeper
> > version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new release once
> > that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure between DL and
> > BK.
> >
> > Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be included
> in
> > the first release.
> >
> > Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager for first
> > release?
> >
> > - Sijie
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] First Release
Posted by Khurrum Nasim <kh...@gmail.com>.
+1 (non-binding)
I am also interested in participating.
- kn
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'd like to start the discussion about the first release. There are still a
> few discussions and pull requests outstanding. I think we need to pick up a
> few items and cut the first release and then iterate from there. Here is a
> list of items that I think we should include:
>
> - DL-4 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-4>: Repackaging namespace
> to org.apache (the pull request is out and under reviewing)
> - DL-49 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-49>: support scala 2.10
> and 2.11 (the review is done, need to be merged)
> - DL-23 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-23>: Move DL to depend
> on
> central maven repo. The main blocker is about the libthrift version, which
> is only hosted at twtter's maven repo. There is a pull request out.
>
> I am kind of thinking to not make DL-2
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DL-2> (using the official
> bookkeeper
> version) the blocker for the first release. We can cut a new release once
> that change is ready. So to decouple the release procedure between DL and
> BK.
>
> Please feel free to add any jiras that you believe it should be included in
> the first release.
>
> Also, is there anyone interested in being the release manager for first
> release?
>
> - Sijie
>