Summary of IRC Meeting in #aurora at Mon Jul 27 18:01:07 2015:
Attendees: thalin, dnorris, jfarrell, wfarner, kts, mkhutornenko, benley,
dlester
- Preface
- packages for 0.9.0
IRC log follows:
## Preface ##
[Mon Jul 27 18:01:14 2015] wfarner: let's start with roll call
[Mon Jul 27 18:01:15
+1
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Bill Farner wfar...@apache.org wrote:
Hi folks,
An issue that we have not yet officially addressed is release management as
it pertains to binary artifacts we produce of Aurora. Today, when we cut a
release, say 0.9.0, we essentially take a snapshot of
Hi folks,
An issue that we have not yet officially addressed is release management as
it pertains to binary artifacts we produce of Aurora. Today, when we cut a
release, say 0.9.0, we essentially take a snapshot of (most of) our
repository as a basis for voting and eventual distribution.
An
In order to make this repeatable it might be good to split this off
entirely into its own aurora-packaging repo. If its still in the main repo
then when we create the release branch the packaging source will still be
in the new release branch, but the packaging code would not necessarily
line up
Wouldn't a separate repo make it even more difficult to associate build
script changes to source code changes?
-=Bill
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 8:22 PM, Jake Farrell jfarr...@apache.org wrote:
In order to make this repeatable it might be good to split this off
entirely into its own
Is the REST API interface planned to be be identical/close to the thrift api
interface?
And if we leave the client dsl modifications for custom executors, for now we
can build a generic client to use the thrift api directly for supporting custom
executors. Cursory look of the client api code
