On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 6:17 PM, Juhani Connolly < [email protected]> wrote:
> When I first got involved in the project, and actually managed to > familiarise myself with the codebase and outstanding issues somewhat, one > of my greatest concerns was that it seemed like some of the core initial > objectives for FLUME-728 seem to have fallen by the wayside in favor of > feature creep. > What do you think about starting a thread to discuss the roadmap for Flume 1.1.0 and beyond? Prioritization is important, as well as agreement on what makes sense to target for the next release. I bet you will hear resounding agreement if you say something along the lines of system stability, performance, and API definition / stabilization for clients of Flume. Further, with the JDBC channel and memory channel we have a hard choice > between a flimsy channel with the potential for high dataloss and a > heavyweight one with only moderate throughput... The FileChannel issue has > been more or less stationary. Where are we going with this? Do we not > consider it particularly important, or is it just stationary because it is > a hard problem? If the latter, hopefully we could kick off some discussion > on how to deal with it. > If this is something you are interested in, you should definitely kick off a continued design discussion for the FileChannel. You are right that FLUME-896 hasn't gotten much attention recently. I see in that Jira that Eric suggested submitting a FEP design document... something to consider. Finally, it seems like every single issue is reported as major, when it > really isn't the case for many of them. Many issues also do not have a > version number attached. It makes prioritizing anything to work on awkward, > perhaps we should be taking more liberties with recategorizing the severity > of issues? If others also feel this way I would like to sort through the > current open major tickets and recategorize some so we can focus work on > the core issues. > I think it's because Major happens to be the default severity. I don't think it would hurt to move any open Jiras affecting NG alpha releases to affecting v1.0.0, and changing the severity of issues based on your judgement of the impact. But I think prioritization and target versions for issues will largely fall out of a combination of a roadmap discussion and having people available to work on them. Regards, Mike
