+1 I would only try to merge as many of the smaller network stack improvements as possible for 1.4, since they give quite big performance improvement.
Piotrek > On 16 Oct 2017, at 17:42, Eron Wright <eronwri...@gmail.com> wrote: > > +1 from our side on this plan. > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> OK, sounds good to me. >> >> We have a couple of bugs to fix for the Table API / SQL but have PRs for >> most of them. >> >> There's only one major issue that I'd like to include in 1.4.0 which is a >> refactoring of the TableSource interface. >> This effort has already started and is currently waiting for reviews / >> comments. >> I'm quite confident that we can get it in within the next two weeks. >> >> Cheers, Fabian >> >> 2017-10-16 10:22 GMT+02:00 Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>: >> >>> @Bowen I started marking essential stuff as blocking (with fixVersion >>> 1.4.0). You're right, that we should start moving things to 1.5.0 that >> are >>> not blocking and that we don't think will make it into 1.4.0. I think we >>> can only release 1.4.0 if there are 0 (zero) unresolved issues with >>> fixVersion 1.4.0. >>> >>>> On 14. Oct 2017, at 07:34, Alexandru Gutan <alex.guta...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> great >>>> >>>> On 13 October 2017 at 18:02, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) < >>>> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> totally agree with the way.-------------------------- >>>>> ----------------------------------------发件人：Stephan Ewen < >>> se...@apache.org >>>>>> 发送时间：2017年10月13日(星期五) 21:29收件人：dev@flink.apache.org < >>> dev@flink.apache.org>主 >>>>> 题：Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing Flink 1.4 >>>>> I am in favor of doing this, if we can set it up in the following way. >>>>> >>>>> - We put out the 1.4 release now, as Till and Aljoscha suggested. A >>>>> stable cut before the fundamental changes go in. >>>>> >>>>> - We merge the very big changes (FLIP-6, Network stack, localized >> state >>>>> restore, etc). directly (or very soon) after. >>>>> - We try to stabilize these changes and release 1.5 asap after that. >>>>> Ideally Around end of year or so. >>>>> >>>>> The reason I am bringing this up is that I know various users waiting >>> very >>>>> much for FLIP-6 and Network Stack enhancements. Given that these >> issues >>>>> were flagged for release 1.4, the users were planning to have them >>> rather >>>>> soon. >>>>> >>>>> Stephan >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Aljoscha Krettek < >> aljos...@apache.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1 Excellent >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd like to volunteer as release manager. I already set >>>>> up a Kanban board >>>>>> to monitor the open blocking (and non-blocking) issues >>>>> for 1.4, though this >>>>>> is independent of me volunteering as release manager. We >>>>> should all go over >>>>>> these issues and see which ones should actually be blockin >>>>> g and which ones >>>>>> are not yet on that list. >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 13. Oct 2017, at 12:24, Renjie Liu <liurenjie2...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cool!!! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 5:49 PM Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org >>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I want to revive the discussion about releasing Flink 1.4 [1] and >> the >>>>>> set >>>>>>>> of features to include. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The gist of the previous discussion was that we postponed the >> feature >>>>>>>> freeze for 1.4 in order to include some more features w >>>>> hich were being >>>>>>>> developed. By now, we have completed a good set of features such as >>>>>> exactly >>>>>>>> once Kafka producer, reduced dependency footprint, Hado >>>>> op-free Flink and >>>>>>>> many bug fixes. I believe that these features will >>>>> make good release and >>>>>>>> users are already waiting for them. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Some of the other features which we wanted to include, >>>>> mainly Flip-6, to >>>>>>>> some extent the network stack enhancements and the state decoupling >>>>>> still >>>>>>>> need some more time. Since these features are major >>>>> changes to Flink's >>>>>>>> runtime, it would be in my opinion a good idea to cut a >>>>> stable release >>>>>> with >>>>>>>> the above-mentioned feature set now and give the engine >>>>> features a bit >>>>>> more >>>>>>>> time to ripen and be properly tested. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Therefore, I would actually be in favour of aiming for >>>>> a quick release >>>>>>>> meaning that we now concentrate mainly on fixing bugs and critical >>>>>> issues. >>>>>>>> Moreover, I'm optimistic that the delayed features will be >> completed >>>>>> soon >>>>>>>> such that we can deliver them with the next release. Wh >>>>> at do you think? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3. >>>>>> nabble.com/DISCUSS-Flink-1-4-and-time-based-release-td19331.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> Till >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Liu, Renjie >>>>>>> Software Engineer, MVAD >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>
