I'd suggest to do 2.2.0 as quickly as possible, and target 2.3.0 for October. I don't see a reason to delay 2.2.0 until October: there's a huge amount of features worth releasing between when 2.1.0 was cut and the current HEAD.
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 10:18 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > With a 2.2.0 in October, I think we can try to move forward on RedisIO. > > I'm now back from vacation and I will resume the work on this IO. > > Regards > JB > > On 08/30/2017 11:27 PM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote: > > RedisIO in 2.2.0 is very unlikely. There's still a lot of review > remaining > > last time I checked on the PR. > > > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 2:24 PM Vilhelm von Ehrenheim < > > vonehrenh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Any chance to get the RedisIO in this release? > >> [BEAM-1017] Add RedisIO #1687 > >> > >> Its not my PR but ll be happy to assist if there is anything I can do to > >> help. > >> > >> On 30 Aug 2017 22:46, "Daniel Ribeiro" <danie...@squareup.com.invalid> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> It would be great to get a bump on pubsub > >>> <https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/pom.xml#L145> dependency. > It > >>> is > >>> currently very outdated (v1-rev10-1.22.0, which was released over a > year > >>> ago > >>> <http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/google/apis/google- > >>> api-services-pubsub/v1-rev10-1.22.0/> > >>> ). > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Eugene Kirpichov < > >>> kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Thanks Ismael. I've marked these two issues for fix in 2.2.0. > >> Definitely > >>>> agree that at least the first one must be fixed. > >>>> > >>>> Here's the current burndown list > >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12341044 - we > >>> should > >>>> clean it up. > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:20 PM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> The current master has accumulated a good amount of nice features > >>>>> since 2.1.0 so a new release is welcomed. I have two JIRAs/PR that I > >>>>> think are important to check/solve before the cut: > >>>>> > >>>>> BEAM-2516 (this is a regression on the performance of Direct runner > >> on > >>>>> Java). We had never really defined if a performance regression is > >>>>> critical to be a blocker. I executed WordCount with the kinglear.txt > >>>>> (170KB) file in version 2.1.0 vs the current 2.2.0-SNAPSHOT and I > >>>>> found that the execution time passed from 5s to 126s. So maybe we > >> need > >>>>> to review this one before the release. I can understand if others > >>>>> consider this a minor issue because the Direct runner is not supposed > >>>>> to be used for production, but this performance regression can cause > >> a > >>>>> bad impression for a casual user starting with Beam. > >>>>> > >>>>> BEAM-2790 (fix reading from Amazon S3 via HadoopFileSystem). I think > >>>>> this one is a nice to have. I am not sure that I can tackle it for > >> the > >>>>> wednesday cut. I’m OOO until the beginning of next week, but maybe > >>>>> someone else can take a look. In the worst case this is not a release > >>>>> blocker but definitely a really nice fix to include. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:49 PM, Eugene Kirpichov > >>>>> <kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote: > >>>>>> I'd like to get the following PRs into 2.2.0: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> #3765 <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/3765> [BEAM-2753 > >>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2753>] Fixes > >> translation > >>>> of > >>>>>> WriteFiles side inputs (important bugfix for DynamicDestinations in > >>>>> files) > >>>>>> #3725 <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/3725> [BEAM-2827 > >>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2827>] Introduces > >>>>>> AvroIO.watchForNewFiles (parity for AvroIO with TextIO in a few > >>>> important > >>>>>> features) > >>>>>> #3759 <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/3759> [BEAM-2828 > >>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2828>] Moves Match > >> into > >>>>>> FileIO.match()/matchAll() (to prevent releasing current > >>>>>> Match.filepatterns() into 2.2.0 and then having to keep it under > >> that > >>>>> name) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:31 AM Mingmin Xu <mingm...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Glad to see that 2.2.0 is coming. Can we include SQL feature in > >> next > >>>>>>> release? We're in the final stage and expect to merge back to > >> master > >>>>> this > >>>>>>> week. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Reuven Lax > >>> <re...@google.com.invalid > >>>>> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Now that Beam 2.1.0 has finally completed, I think we should cut > >>>> Beam > >>>>>>> 2.2.0 > >>>>>>>> soon. I volunteer to coordinate this release. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Are there any pending pull requests that people think should be > >>>> merged > >>>>>>>> before we cut 2.2.0? If so, please let me know soon, as I would > >>> like > >>>>> to > >>>>>>> cut > >>>>>>>> by Wednesday of next week. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Reuven > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> ---- > >>>>>>> Mingmin > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > jbono...@apache.org > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com >
