Re: [DISCUSS] Does stale bot make value for you?

Hi Penghui, Thanks for your feedback! Comments inline: > If we removed the stale label, how can we know which issues/PRs are active? GitHub Search supports filter by updated time: * https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+updated%3A%3E2022-07-01 updated in this month * ht

Re: [VOTE] PIP-193 : Sink preprocessing Function

+1 (non-binding) Thanks, Baodi Shi > On Jul 28, 2022, at 22:2028, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > Thank you > > I am sure that this feature will have a huge impact on Pulsar IO users > > Enrico > > Il giorno gio 28 lug 2022 alle ore 12:39 Christophe Bornet > ha scritto: >> >>

Re: [DISCUSS] Does stale bot make value for you?

Hi tison, Thanks for bringing up this discussion. The stale label can help contributors to filter out inactive PRs and issues(no active comments for more than a month) So that the contributors can focus on the active issues and PRs. I think we should start to consider closing the issues and PRs

[DISCUSS] Does stale bot make value for you?

Hi, Previous discussion: * [DISCUSS] How to handle stale PRs [1] * [DISCUSS] Add icebox label for issues and PRs that have been inactive for more than 4 weeks [2] I notice that over 80% (1527/1891 ATM) issues are marked as stable but nothing happens later. In an offline discussion with @codelipe

[GitHub] [pulsar-site] tisonkun commented on issue #146: Provide structural client overview page

tisonkun commented on issue #146: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/issues/146#issuecomment-1199343262 It seems that the source of related contents go into [apache/pulsar](http://github.com/apache/pulsar) repo. I'm going to create a patch for preview there. -- This is an automat

Re: [VOTE] PIP-190: Simplify Pulsar documentation release and maintenance strategy

+1 (binding) Enrico Il giorno ven 29 lug 2022 alle ore 07:02 PengHui Li ha scritto: > > +1 (binding) > > Penghui > On Jul 28, 2022, 16:40 +0800, Zike Yang , wrote: > > +1 (non-binding) > > This will greatly reduce the amount of work that contributors have to > > do to update and maintain the doc

Re: [VOTE] PIP-184: Topic specific consumer priorityLevel

Hi, The vote passes with 3x +1 (binding), 3x +1 (non-binding), 0x -1. +1 (binding) * PengHui * Enrico * Hang +1 (non-binding) * Zike * Guo * Mattison Thanks, Dave On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 10:50 AM Hang Chen wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Thanks, > Hang > > Enrico Olivelli 于2022年7月29日周五 15:01写道： >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-184: Topic specific consumer priorityLevel

+1 (binding) Thanks, Hang Enrico Olivelli 于2022年7月29日周五 15:01写道： > > +1 (binding) > > Enrico > > Il Ven 29 Lug 2022, 07:13 PengHui Li ha scritto: > > > +1 (binding) > > > > Penghui > > On Jul 25, 2022, 13:42 +0800, mattison chao , > > wrote: > > > +1(non-binding) > > > > > > Best, > > > Mattiso

[GitHub] [pulsar-client-node] iTech-dhananjay commented on issue #87: npm install fails on MacOS

iTech-dhananjay commented on issue #87: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-node/issues/87#issuecomment-1199075680 Similar issue faced. - For Mac M1 Silicon Chip Resolution :- if there is any gap or space in your folder name , kindly avoid that . As Folder name (DevOps Team)

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-180: Shadow Topic, an alternative way to support readonly topic ownership.

> I think that there are still some references to shadow_message_id but > IIUC we don't need to add that field anymore because we are going to > use > optional MessageIdData message_id = 9; > is this correct ? Yes, no more `shadow_message_id`. Sorry I missed these references, already updated.

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-180: Shadow Topic, an alternative way to support readonly topic ownership.

Il giorno ven 29 lug 2022 alle ore 09:05 Haiting Jiang ha scritto: > > Hi Enrico, > > Any further suggestion on this PIP? > If not, I would like to raise a revote on this in a few days. now the PIP LGTM I think that there are still some references to shadow_message_id but IIUC we don't need to

[GitHub] [pulsar-manager] gangming opened a new issue, #476: manager UI login 404

gangming opened a new issue, #476: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-manager/issues/476 https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/15102743/18178-fdeb67d7-2247-49f8-9185-a0c5465775ab.png";> -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, p

Re: [DISCUSS] Restart Release Pulsar 2.7.5

Hi Penghui, > I see #11992 was closed, and we’d better onboard #16326 in 2.7.5 Sure, I will help Zixuan on this. > For the merged PRs with label "release/2.7.6" > We should change them to "release/2.7.5" I am updating the label after it's cherry-picked to branch 2.7 There won't be any PR labele

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-180: Shadow Topic, an alternative way to support readonly topic ownership.

Hi Enrico, Any further suggestion on this PIP? If not, I would like to raise a revote on this in a few days. Thanks, Haiting On 2022/07/07 11:30:59 Haiting Jiang wrote: > Hi Enrico, > > Thanks for your feedback. > > On 2022/07/05 08:03:43 Enrico Olivelli wrote: > > I have a couple of addition

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-180: Shadow Topic, an alternative way to support readonly topic ownership.

Hi Penghui, > Please also update the proposal for schema handling. Done, all content discussed in this thread is updated in [1] Thanks, Haiting [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/16153 On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 1:19 PM PengHui Li wrote: > Sound good to me. > > Please also update the p

Re: [VOTE] PIP-184: Topic specific consumer priorityLevel

+1 (binding) Enrico Il Ven 29 Lug 2022, 07:13 PengHui Li ha scritto: > +1 (binding) > > Penghui > On Jul 25, 2022, 13:42 +0800, mattison chao , > wrote: > > +1(non-binding) > > > > Best, > > Mattison > > > > On Mon, 25 Jul 2022 at 13:19, guo jiwei wrote: > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > Regards > >