+1 to cut an RC. Here are a couple of PRs that could maybe go in
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2719 https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2800 (this one requires some changes, but we should be able to fix it pretty quickly) also would like to get https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2805 reviewed, it might change some public methods. Other than that, we should try to remove as much deprecated code as we can before release https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2947 Den man. 10. sep. 2018 kl. 21.59 skrev Alexandre Vermeerbergen < [email protected]>: > +1 for an Storm 2.0 as soon as possible, let's jump into the future :) > Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 à 21:50, Kishorkumar Patil > <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > > Looking into all issues reported under epic > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2714 are resolved/closed. I > > don't see any open issues/blockers at this point for going ahead with 2.x > > release. > > > > I am +1 to 2.0 release. > > > > Regards, > > -Kishor > > > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 2:24 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > I agree, and looking through the JIRAs against 2.0, I would say a > majority > > > of the ones marked critical are not critical. > > > > > > I’m +1 on moving forward with a 2.0 release, but will give others time > to > > > respond with any JIRAs they think should be included. > > > > > > > p.s. I don't want to create branch-2.x or branch-2.0.x until > absolutely > > > > necessary, I don't see any major features with pull requests up but > if > > > you > > > > do run across one please send something out before merging it in, so > we > > > can > > > > set up the branches properly at that time. > > > > > > > > > Agree. We can always branch off the release tag/commit. > > > > > > -Taylor > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 10, 2018, at 12:25 PM, Bobby Evans <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > It has been nearly a month since this was originally sent out, and > this > > > is > > > > not the first of these kinds of emails to go out about a 2.0.0 > release. > > > I > > > > think we have made a lot of really good progress on getting ready > for a > > > 2.0 > > > > release, and I really would like to see it happen before another > month > > > > passes. > > > > > > > > We have a 2.0 based deploy in some of our staging clusters, currently > > > > following the master branch with a little that is Yahoo specific on > top. > > > We > > > > would like to start pushing towards production with it soon. > > > > > > > > There are a few issues that we are aware of. > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20STORM%20AND% > > > 20affectedVersion%20in%20(2.0.0)%20AND%20resolution%20%3D% > > > 20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC > > > > > > > > There are no blockers still open, and only 4 issues listed as > critical. > > > > > > > > If others have any open issues that feel need to be addressed prior > to a > > > > 2.0.0 release please respond to this with the JIRA number. I would > like > > > to > > > > set a goal/tentative date of Sep 17th (one week from today) to put > > > together > > > > a release candidate for a 2.0.0 release, and unless there are major > > > > blockers that show up I think we can do it. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Bobby Evans > > > > > > > > p.s. I don't want to create branch-2.x or branch-2.0.x until > absolutely > > > > necessary, I don't see any major features with pull requests up but > if > > > you > > > > do run across one please send something out before merging it in, so > we > > > can > > > > set up the branches properly at that time. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:47 PM Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I'd like to say first, thanks Stig to take up remaining issues. > Thanks > > > to > > > >> his efforts, according to the epic, we have only one major issue > left: > > > >> porting UI to Java [1], and pull request [2] is available for that. > > > >> There're another issues [3] [4] targeting 2.0.0 (since it is > backward > > > >> incompatible) but they are all about removing deprecated things, so > > > easier > > > >> to be reviewed and make decisions. > > > >> > > > >> Once we have a patch for that now, IMHO it would be good to review > and > > > ship > > > >> in 2.0.0 if it wouldn't take a month or so. We could do some sanity > > > tests > > > >> in parallel, so waiting for UI port would not block much time on > > > releasing > > > >> Storm 2.0.0. > > > >> > > > >> - Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > > > >> > > > >> 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1311 > > > >> 2. https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2752 > > > >> 3. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2947 > > > >> 4. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3156 > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> 2018년 7월 11일 (수) 오전 5:12, Alexandre Vermeerbergen < > > > >> [email protected]>님이 > > > >> 작성: > > > >> > > > >>> +1 would love to try it when an RC is avail! > > > >>> > > > >>> Alexandre Vermeerbergen > > > >>> > > > >>> 2018-07-10 21:15 GMT+02:00 Arun Mahadevan <[email protected]>: > > > >>>> +1 to get it out soon. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On 7/10/18, 11:52 AM, "P. Taylor Goetz" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> +1 Sounds good to me. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> -Taylor > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>> On Jul 10, 2018, at 2:18 AM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Hi devs, > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> I hopefully have a time to sort out issues regarding Storm > 2.0.0 and > > > >>> link > > > >>>>>> to epic issue. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2714 > > > >>>>>> (require login to Apache JIRA to see issues in epic) > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> I guess we are close to the release, mostly left reviewing some > > > >> pending > > > >>>>>> pull requests, and some manual sanity tests. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Given that master branch is relatively stabilized for Travis CI > > > >> build, > > > >>> as > > > >>>>>> well as style check and Java port make codebase better (at > least for > > > >>> me), I > > > >>>>>> would really want to make Storm 2.0.0 released sooner than > later, > > > and > > > >>> rely > > > >>>>>> majorly on 2.x version line. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> So I would propose dev folks to concentrate on remaining tasks > for > > > >>> Storm > > > >>>>>> 2.0.0 till we announce release. WDYT? > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Thanks, > > > >>>>>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > > >
