At the very least, the Javadocs should be available by version. This is
something I used to do but looks like we forgot to keep doing that after
the transition to Apache. Maintaining other docs (tutorials, etc.) by
version is more difficult as those are rarely updated at the time of
release.
On Fr
+1 (binding)
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 5:30 PM, ģģ ķ wrote:
> +1
>
> 2015-10-28 2:48 GMT+09:00 P. Taylor Goetz :
>
> > All,
> >
> > The IP Clearance process for the Alibaba JStorm code donation has
> > completed.
> >
> > The IP Clearance Status document can be found here:
> >
> > http://incubator.a
I would like to know what the benefits of upgrading would be. Upgrading a
dependency, especially something as core as this, carries with it risk.
Once we know the benefits we can weigh that against the risk.
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Bobby Evans
wrote:
> We have not really explored going
Congrats Parth!
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 4:59 PM, P. Taylor Goetz wrote:
> Please join me in welcoming Parth Brahmbhatt as a new Apache Storm
> Committer/PMC member.
>
> Parth has demonstrated a strong commitment to the Apache Storm community
> through active participation and mentoring on the St
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-650?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14333715#comment-14333715
]
Nathan Marz commented on STORM-650:
---
The kafka consumer client wasn't used in
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-677?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14327642#comment-14327642
]
Nathan Marz commented on STORM-677:
---
Option 2 doesn't have to be long term as
+1
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 8:15 AM, Andy Feng wrote:
> +1
>
> Andy Feng
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Feb 18, 2015, at 1:43 PM, P. Taylor Goetz wrote:
> >
> > As a follow-up to the previous discussion regarding adopting project
> bylaws, Iād like to start an official VOTE to formally adopt t
Thursday, February 12, 2015 8:12 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Adopt Apache Storm Bylaws
> >>
> >> That seems fine to me. Most other projects I have worked on follow a
> similar procedure, and a retroactive -1 can be applied, without having it
> codified, but making i
to codify that, I'm okay with it.
>
> -Taylor
>
> > On Feb 11, 2015, at 9:06 PM, Nathan Marz wrote:
> >
> > I'm -1 on these bylaws. This commit process encourages merging as fast as
> > possible and does not give adequate time for dissenting opinions to
I'm -1 on these bylaws. This commit process encourages merging as fast as
possible and does not give adequate time for dissenting opinions to veto a
patch. I'm concerned about two things:
1. Regressions - Having too lax of a merge process will lead to unforeseen
regressions. We all saw this first
The critical feature is putting a cap on the total size of log files kept
for a worker. As long as log4j2 allows you to put a hard limit (e.g. 1GB
total across all log files for a worker, with older files being deleted as
limit is exceeded), then I don't mind switching.
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 9:43
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-561?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14243304#comment-14243304
]
Nathan Marz commented on STORM-561:
---
Topologies are Thrift objects no matter
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-561?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14233947#comment-14233947
]
Nathan Marz edited comment on STORM-561 at 12/4/14 6:3
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-561?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14233947#comment-14233947
]
Nathan Marz commented on STORM-561:
---
[~amontalenti] Why are you using the Clojure
t; >>
> >> I think we need to get more eyes on this. If anyone has the resources to
> >> do so please do.
> >>
> >> I'm +1 for reverting, but I'd also like to have a root cause.
> >>
> >> -Taylor
> >>
> >>
> &
-1. Looking at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-350 it seems the
upgrade to disruptor caused message loss issues. That upgrade should be
reverted, or I'd like @clockfly to provide more insight.
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Harsha wrote:
> I am +1 releasing 0.9.3
> +1 on including
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-523?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Nathan Marz resolved STORM-523.
---
Resolution: Not a Problem
-1, Storm's build is Maven now. Maintaing two separate builds would
Trident will not run properly without acking enabled, as its used to
coordinate batches.
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 4:09 AM, clay teahouse
wrote:
> Hello,
> I am trying to turn off acking by settingTOPOLOGY_ACKER_EXECUTORS to 0. But
> when I do that my trident topology fails with the following error
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-404?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14159600#comment-14159600
]
Nathan Marz commented on STORM-404:
---
Yes, switching to ZeroMQ transport may fix
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-404?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14159592#comment-14159592
]
Nathan Marz commented on STORM-404:
---
Do you see this problem with the ZeroMQ trans
20 matches
Mail list logo
