Mailing-List: contact dev-help@curator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@curator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of mckenzie.cam@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.217.180 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAFAMeYJi6zMMvS2P0egYC+CX_wmDJ=FR27TGuDsNeoV_8N7JJw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <etPan.53e22568.46e87ccd.795d@Jordans-MacBook-Pro.local>
	<CANykduYVMeR7UBcCxN3iWCdXyeSR3m2-ZmA74V=KXTSBaHOo=Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<etPan.53e39324.25e45d32.795d@Jordans-MacBook-Pro.local>
	<CAFAMeYKrp+ZC86sDJa1=JqT2S1=h6rejv1u_CbAYZgS8hQE6-Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<etPan.53e3a755.7c83e458.795d@Jordans-MacBook-Pro.local>
	<CANykduaf44RkUA6nusppJEq3xesRpG2j4vfEbzYjaLUS4Y3d2A@mail.gmail.com>
	<etPan.544a7547.3d1b58ba.3938@Jordans-MacBook-Pro.local>
	<CAFAMeYK0KFDALTvM+xBdTQWUA4M7kNGyk-+RpUGFd732PPHNVA@mail.gmail.com>
	<etPan.544a85a5.1f16e9e8.3938@Jordans-MacBook-Pro.local>
	<CAFAMeYJi6zMMvS2P0egYC+CX_wmDJ=FR27TGuDsNeoV_8N7JJw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 14:55:33 +1100
Message-ID: 
 <CANykdubcQh0pwohDRY_o3CGEaTYgYzyJM5f_VtZDC-bYEiXN6w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: ZooKeeper 3.5.0 is coming
From: Cameron McKenzie <mckenzie.cam@gmail.com>
To: Mike Drob <madrob@cloudera.com>
Cc: Jordan Zimmerman <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com>, dev@curator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0160b3bad1061d05064b6259

--089e0160b3bad1061d05064b6259
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I don't think that backwards compatibility should be a big issue in regards
to dynamic cluster configuration. But now that I think about it, if we're
using the ability to revoke watches, then that will certainly cause
compatibility issues. Agreed that a Curator 3.0 (or 2.8 or whatever) is the
way forward.
cheers

On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 4:03 AM, Mike Drob <madrob@cloudera.com> wrote:

> That's fine too. Probably something like Curator 2.7.X is the last one to
> support ZK 3.4.X and then Curator 2.8.0 will have ZK 3.5 features? We can
> leave the possibility of a 2.7.1 in the future in case there turns out to
> be some particularly relevant bug that needs to be addressed.
>
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <
> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>
>> When 3.4.5 came out with the transaction APIs I just documented that
>> version X.X.X (I forget which) was the last version of Curator that woul=
d
>> support 3.3.x and below. We could do the same for this.
>>
>> -JZ
>>
>>
>> On October 24, 2014 at 11:58:48 AM, Mike Drob (madrob@cloudera.com)
>> wrote:
>>
>> I would strongly prefer to have one version, even if it means that we
>> need to do some reflection hacking under the hood. I think it greatly
>> simplifies the narrative for users both when starting out and when
>> upgrading.
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  I haven=E2=80=99t had time. The upcoming ZooKeeper meetup should give =
details
>>> on when to expect 3.5.0. One thing we might need to do is have two vers=
ions
>>> of Curator for a while as not everyone will move to 3.5.0 immediately.
>>>
>>>  -Jordan
>>>
>>>
>>> On October 24, 2014 at 12:03:41 AM, Cameron McKenzie (
>>> mckenzie.cam@gmail.com) wrote:
>>>
>>>  Has anyone had any further thoughts about ZK 3.5 and dynamic cluster
>>> reconfiguration?
>>>
>>> I had a look into the EnsembleProvider interface, but I don't think tha=
t
>>> it will work because it is used to create the connection to ZooKeeper, =
and
>>> from my (limited) understanding of the way that cluster configuration w=
orks
>>> in ZK 3.5, you need a connection to ZK before you can work out all of t=
he
>>> nodes in the cluster. So, there is a bit of a chicken and egg problem.
>>>
>>> cheers
>>> Cam
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 2:20 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>>> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  We could use a label. However, I have version 3.0.0 set for ZK 3.5.x
>>>> compatibility so we can just use that.
>>>>
>>>>  -JZ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Mike Drob <madrob@cloudera.com> <madrob@cloudera.com>
>>>> Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <dev@curator.apache.org>>
>>>> <dev@curator.apache.org>
>>>> Date: August 7, 2014 at 10:28:16 AM
>>>> To: dev@curator.apache.org <dev@curator.apache.org>>
>>>> <dev@curator.apache.org>
>>>> Cc: Cameron McKenzie <mckenzie.cam@gmail.com>> <mckenzie.cam@gmail.com=
>
>>>> Subject:  Re: ZooKeeper 3.5.0 is coming
>>>>
>>>>  I saw that they added the ability to remove watches, so that could be
>>>> a
>>>> viable approach for CURATOR-14?
>>>>
>>>> Are we using a JIRA label to group the issues and make them easily
>>>> findable?
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>>>> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > I think we should list all the changes that we need to do and get
>>>> Jira=E2=80=99s
>>>> > written for them (targeted for version 3.0.0) and then we can divide
>>>> up the
>>>> > work.
>>>> >
>>>> > -JZ
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > From: Cameron McKenzie <mckenzie.cam@gmail.com>
>>>> > Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <dev@curator.apache.org>>
>>>> > Date: August 7, 2014 at 12:45:21 AM
>>>> > To: dev@curator.apache.org <dev@curator.apache.org>>
>>>> > Subject: Re: ZooKeeper 3.5.0 is coming
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm happy to start looking into this in a bit more detail unless
>>>> someone
>>>> > else has their heart set on it.
>>>> > cheers
>>>> > Cam
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

--089e0160b3bad1061d05064b6259--