mesos-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Lester <d...@davelester.org>
Subject Re: [Breaking Change 0.24, MESOS 1988] Silently ignore launchTask/acceptOffers calls when disconnected
Date Tue, 23 Jun 2015 17:33:04 GMT
Hi Marco and Anand,

I see a difference between a brief conversation on the JIRA issue, and
creating a separate thread to propose a breaking change -- particularly
when it's one that affects framework writers who may not be active in
the day-to-day changes of the core. Now that JIRA issue emails are sent
to dev@ instead to issues@, I think it's even more-important that
separate threads are created on dev@ to discuss such changes prior to
having them committed. 

It looks like there's at least one comment on the JIRA issue since this
notice went to the list, which is discussion that should really be
happening up front rather than after it's committed.

Lastly, I think it's important that we break out of the practice of
encouraging folks to communicate off-list for changes like this. I
understand your comment to "talk to BenH for greater detail" was meant
with good intent, but I think it's important that we as a community
collectively engage on the mailing list rather than relying on
out-of-band communication when making decisions.

Thanks for understanding and hearing me out!

Dave

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015, at 10:01 AM, Marco Massenzio wrote:
> Hey Dave,
> 
> sorry about the confusion, but the "deprecation cycle" is happening: this
> change won't take place until 0.24 is out (as the title of this email
> states); this will obviously be captured in the update notes from 0.23 to
> 0.24: as you correctly pointed out, we wanted to give folks very early
> notice of the impending change.
> 
> The conversation has actually taken place on the MESOS-1988 ticket (
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1988) which also gets
> forwarded
> to the issues@ mailing list; this was also proposed and shepherded by
> Vinod, so I would recommend you follow up with him if you want to further
> clarify matters.
> 
> In our limited understanding, this was an "undocumented" behavior so we
> would expect the impact to be minor and the suggested solution to be a
> more
> desirable behavior.
> 
> Please also feel free to reach out to Ben H to discuss in greater depth.
> 
> Thanks for being vigilant!
> 
> *Marco Massenzio*
> *Distributed Systems Engineer*
> 
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Dave Lester <dave@davelester.org> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Anand,
> >
> > Was there a discussion thread on this?
> >
> > Breaking changes should only be introduced when the community has had a
> > chance to discuss its impact and any necessary deprecation cycle -- I
> > didn't see a discussion on the relevant thread, but perhaps I missed
> > something?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dave
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2015, at 05:23 PM, Anand Mazumdar wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > We intend to introduce a breaking change [1] in the driver to silently
> > > ignore launchTasks/acceptOffers(…) calls when disconnected from the
> > > master in 0.24. The previous behavior was to send out “TASK_LOST”
> > > messages since there was no way to know that these task launches were
> > > dropped. However , with the advent of Task Reconciliation, this feature
> > > is redundant. Other calls like killTask/requestResource et al already had
> > > this behavior.
> > >
> > > If your existing framework relied on this behavior, I would encourage you
> > > to use the Task Reconciliation API [2] in lieu of this feature/hack. Let
> > > me know if you have any queries/concerns.
> > >
> > > Links:
> > > [1] Tracking JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1988
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1988>
> > > [2] Task Reconciliation API :
> > > http://mesos.apache.org/documentation/latest/reconciliation/
> > > <http://mesos.apache.org/documentation/latest/reconciliation/>
> > >
> > > -anand
> >
> >

Mime
View raw message