With the VOTE underway for a 0.9.4 release ( if you have time, please evaluate the RC and vote accordingly), I’d like to turn our attention toward the 0.10.0 release.
I’d appreciate feedback on the state of the 0.10.0 (master) branch, especially from those who have been involved in developing the security-related features (which is one of the primary features of this branch). Personally, I know of several organizations that are using a build of 0.10.0 successfully in production with security enabled. The main issue I’ve seen people struggle with is not a problem with code itself, but rather difficulties in setting up a secure cluster and interacting with other systems that are secured with Kerberos. I see that as more of a documentation issue, and not something that should block a release. One feature that I think is essential for 0.10.0 is STORM-634 [1] (support for rolling upgrades), which was recently merged. This should make post-0.10.0 upgrades a lot less painful for users. Based on the feedback received thus far, it looks like all the suggested patches have either been merged or are ready to be merged, with the exception of STORM-617 [2] (no patch available yet). Should we wait for STORM-617? Any other patch suggestions? -Taylor [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-634 [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-617 On Mar 12, 2015, at 12:29 PM, T B <thomas...@arcor.de> wrote: > +1 for releasing 0.9.4 > > Thomas > > On 11 March 2015 at 21:39, Richard Kellogg <rmkell...@comcast.net> wrote: > >> Suggest we pull in STORM-559 as well. It is strictly an update to >> documentation and has already been merged to trunk. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: P. Taylor Goetz [mailto:ptgo...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 4:51 PM >> To: dev@storm.apache.org >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Release Storm 0.9.4 / 0.10.0 >> >> Thanks for the feedback Richard, Parth, and Jungtaek. I’ve made a note of >> your suggestions for the releases. >> >> Does anyone else have any thoughts (esp. committers)? Should we move >> forward with releasing? >> >> -Taylor >> >> On Mar 5, 2015, at 5:00 PM, 임정택 <kabh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> storm-redis (scheduled to be released at 0.10.0) has one bugfix and >>> one essential feature PRs. >>> >>> - bugfix: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-690 >>> -- It fixes connection pool issue. >>> - feature: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-691 >>> -- It provides basic lookup / persist bolts so I believe it's necessary. >>> >>> Furthermore, I'd like to continue to support various data types with >>> storm-redis Trident, after STORM-691 is merged to master. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Regards >>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >>> >>> >>> 2015-03-06 2:37 GMT+09:00 P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> I’d like to start a discussion for releasing 0.9.4 (maintenance >>>> release) and 0.10.0 (security release). >>>> >>>> 0.9.4 is basically a branch of 0.9.3 with two important bug fixes: >>>> >>>> STORM-329: fix cascading Storm failure by improving >>>> reconnection strategy and buffering messages >>>> STORM-130: Supervisor getting killed due to >>>> java.io.FileNotFoundException: File '../stormconf.ser' does not exist. >>>> >>>> Both are long-standing bugs that have proven problematic for many users. >>>> I’d be in favor of releasing 0.9.4 with just those two fixes, but I’m >>>> interested in finding out if anyone thinks there are additional >>>> patches to master that should be considered for 0.9.4. >>>> >>>> 0.10.0 is a much larger release in terms of changes. In addition to >>>> the changes above, it includes all the new security features and >>>> numerous fixes and enhancements (see the CHANGELOG in the master branch >> for a full list). >>>> >>>> Do we feel 0.10.0 is ready for release? If not what outstanding >>>> bugs/patches should we consider before releasing? >>>> >>>> I’m fine holding off on a 0.10.0 release if we feel there is >>>> additional work to be done, but I’d like to at least move forward with >> 0.9.4 release. >>>> >>>> Thoughts? >>>> >>>> -Taylor >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Name : 임 정택 >>> Blog : http://www.heartsavior.net / http://dev.heartsavior.net Twitter >>> : http://twitter.com/heartsavior LinkedIn : >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/heartsavior >> >> >>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
