ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ilya Kasnacheev <ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Apache Ignite 2.7 release
Date Mon, 10 Sep 2018 09:16:02 GMT
Hello!

There's still two issues with the submission.

The first one is that we're downloading "latest" version from preferred
mirror but a specified version, such as "2.6", we're also going to download
from "slow" archive.apache.org/dist.
That's a great limitation for this change, since most real deployments of
Apache Ignite will have their Ignite version pegged to a specific release.
But in this case there's no win in download speed.
*In my opinion it is a blocker.*

The second one is that we can't download anything when we failed to resolve
"latest". My idea is that we should try and download last known version in
this case, which can be pushed to source from pom.xml, as we already do
with URLs. So if you could not resolve "latest" you will download 2.7.0.

Buuut, maybe it's not necessary, maybe we should just *discourage "latest"*,
which is in my opinion almost always a bad idea.

WDYT?

Regards,
-- 
Ilya Kasnacheev


вс, 9 сент. 2018 г. в 5:47, Roman Shtykh <rshtykh@yahoo.com>:

> Hi Ilya,
>
> Sorry, missed that.
> Added now.
>
> --
> Roman Shtykh
>
>
> On Thursday, September 6, 2018, 6:16:58 p.m. GMT+9, Ilya Kasnacheev <
> ilya.kasnacheev@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hello!
>
> The last of my requests still standing is that we should fall-back to
> single URL download in case of error with 'latest' version. Everything else
> looks good to me.
>
> Can we do that? I'm really worried that Apache API will go sour.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Ilya Kasnacheev
>
>
> чт, 6 сент. 2018 г. в 8:56, Roman Shtykh <rshtykh@yahoo.com>:
>
> Hi Ilya,
>
> Thanks again.
>
> 1) Done.
> 2) Used catch() for latest version.
>
> Please see my comments on github.
> --
> Roman Shtykh
>
>
> On Wednesday, September 5, 2018, 11:30:10 p.m. GMT+9, Ilya Kasnacheev <
> ilya.kasnacheev@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hello!
>
> I've left a new wave of replies.
>
> Basically, 1) let's keep DOWNLOAD_URL_PATTERN string value inlined so
> that it will work even if build process is broken (would be useful for e.g.
> developing out of IDE)
> And also I urge you to catch() around new fragile Apache JSON API
> resolving, and download the 'current' version instead, as defined by
> ignite-mesos version.
>
> This is because this module is not under continuouos scrutiny so extra
> care should be applied.
> --
> Ilya Kasnacheev
>
>
> вт, 4 сент. 2018 г. в 13:42, Roman Shtykh <rshtykh@yahoo.com>:
>
> Thanks, Ilya!
> I will check your comments, and discuss it at JIRA.
>
> --
> Roman Shtykh
>
>
> On Tuesday, September 4, 2018, 7:17:53 p.m. GMT+9, Ilya Kasnacheev <
> ilya.kasnacheev@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hello!
>
> IGNITE-9408 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9408> looks
> good to me and may be merged right away.
>
> IGNITE-9388 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9388> needs
> more work in my opinion, I have commented the PR. I also advice having test
> for this functionality.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Ilya Kasnacheev
>
>
> вт, 4 сент. 2018 г. в 6:52, Roman Shtykh <rshtykh@yahoo.com.invalid>:
>
> Igniters,
> I would like Mesos integration update be included in the upcoming
> release.Can anyone review prs for the following issues?
> IGNITE-9388: mesos IgniteProvider tries to access obsolete ignite.run or
> download from slow archiveIGNITE-9408: Update mesos version
>
> Roman Shtykh
>
>     On Thursday, August 30, 2018, 9:25:43 p.m. GMT+9, Vyacheslav Daradur <
> daradurvs@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Hi Igniters!
>
> I'm working on the following Service Grid tasks:
> - IGNITE-8361 Use discovery messages for service deployment
> - IGNITE-8362 Collect service deployment results asynchronously on
> coordinator
> - IGNITE-8363 Handle topology changes during service deployment
> - IGNITE-8364 Propagate deployed services to joining nodes
> - IGNITE-8365 Introduce service failure events
> - IGNITE-3392 Propagate service deployment results from assigned nodes
> to initiator
>
> Let's call them *phase 1* because the should be implemented together
> (atomically).
>
> I do my best to finish phase 1 for including to 2.7 release.
>
> But I'm not sure that the solution will be fully completed till the
> beginning of October.
>
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 7:18 PM Nikolay Izhikov <nizhikov@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hell, Yakov
> >
> > I'm ok with your proposal.
> >
> >        * Scope freeze - September 17 - We should have a full list of
> tickets for 2.7 here.
> >        * Code freeze - October 01 - We should merge all 2.7 tickets to
> master here.
> >        * Vote on RC1 - October 11.
> >        * Vote on release - October 15.
> >
> > В Ср, 29/08/2018 в 12:39 +0300, Yakov Zhdanov пишет:
> > > Nikolay,
> > >
> > > I think we should have 2 weeks after code freeze which by the way may
> > > include RC1 voting stage. This way I would like us to agree that
> release
> > > candidate should be sent to vote on Oct, 11th and we can release on
> Oct,
> > > 15th.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > --Yakov
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
>
>

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