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 <zhaiji...@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 <f...@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" <f...@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 >>> <lstew...@twitter.com.INVALID> >>> > > wrote: >>> > >> >>> > >> +1 >>> > >> >>> > >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Franck Cuny <franck.c...@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....@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> >>> > >>>> +1 especially on DL-23. >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> - Xi >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Khurrum Nasim < >>> > khurrumnas...@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 >>> > >>> >>> > >>> > >>> >> >> >
