flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Planning the 0.9 Release
Date Fri, 05 Jun 2015 11:50:55 GMT
Okay, I was not aware it is only two missing tests. That is not that big a
deal.

I am not very attached to the Spargel Stuff, I just want to make sure we do
not deprecate something that works well for something that is still work in
progress.




On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Andra Lungu <lungu.andra@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Stephan,
>
> I don't know if I have a saying in this, but I will give it a go :)
>
> The two unsolved issues don't affect the functionality at all.
> Gelly can, at the moment, support anything Spargel could. There is a guide
> in the documentation explaining how to migrate Spargel code to Gelly. I
> don't see why Spargel should not be deprecated yet. Just because of those
> missing tests?
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Vasia!
> >
> > We should clearly label Gelly as Work in Progress and at Beta status,
> then
> > it should be okay. This is very fair, it is the first version, people
> > understand that.
> >
> > In that sense, let us not call Spargel deprecated in favor of Gelly yet,
> > but do that for the next release when Gelly is ready.
> >
> > Stephan
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Vasiliki Kalavri <
> > vasilikikalavri@gmail.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > regarding the 2 gelly issues, I'm sorry but I haven't had time to work
> on
> > > these.
> > > And most certainly I won't be able to work on these today :S
> > >
> > > In any case, I wouldn't consider them blocker issues, so if you agree,
> > > please go ahead with the release candidate.
> > >
> > > -Vasia.
> > >
> > > On 5 June 2015 at 11:46, Robert Metzger <rmetzger@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'll address the remaining documentation issues today.
> > > >
> > > > What about
> > > >
> > > >    -
> > > >
> > > >    Sync Streaming Java/Scala API
> > > >    - Consolidate names across batch/streaming (discussion)
> > > >    - Merge static code analysis
> > > >
> > > > and the gelly TODOs
> > > >
> > > >    -
> > > >
> > > >    FLINK-1522 Add tests for the library methods and examples
> > > >    - FLINK-1943 Add Gelly-GSA compiler and translation tests
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > They seem both unresolved.
> > > >
> > > > Other than that it seems we are good to go.
> > > > Maybe we can manage to get the first release candidate out today?
> > > >
> > > > I'm uncertain whether we should fork off the "release-0.9" branch as
> > part
> > > > of the RC creation or whether we should wait a bit with that.
> > > >
> > > > Forking it of would allow us to merge some of the pull requests
> (storm
> > > > compat), but we would need to apply many patches to two branches.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Yes, Till, Max, Ufuk, and me have reached consensus that we will
> > > postpone
> > > > > the batch scheduling to 0.10. It is a crucial feature, but we would
> > not
> > > > > like to have it in a highly pre-mature version in there.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What came up a lot is that there are a good set of additions that
> are
> > > > close
> > > > > to completion. We will probably bring up the suggestion of a 0.10
> > > release
> > > > > very soon after the 0.9 release.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Ufuk Celebi <uce@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Ping.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 04 Jun 2015, at 14:11, Ufuk Celebi <uce@apache.org>
wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Critical issues:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - Skipped buffer (
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/Buffer-re-ordering-problem-td6009.html
> > > > > )
> > > > > > (I'm on it)
> > > > > > > - Execution graph deadlock (FLINK-2133)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm investigating the skipped buffer. I vote to not block the
> > release
> > > > on
> > > > > > this though if I can't reproduce it in the next days.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What about FLINK-2133?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Big open issue:
> > > > > > > - There has been consensus to merge the static code analysis
PR
> > for
> > > > > this
> > > > > > release, which needs some further testing (I'm on it)
> > > > > > > - Batch scheduling. I think Till and Stephan are working
on
> this.
> > > Can
> > > > > > you guys give an estimate whether we will be able to have it
in
> the
> > > > > release?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @Till, Stephan: Will batch scheduling make it into the release?
> :)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message