cool! Thank you so much for rebasing this. - Sijie
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 6:20 PM, liang xie <xieliang...@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 <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 > >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> >
