Hi Tison, I agree that unused HA implementations can be removed since they are dead code. If we should need them in the future, then we can still get them by going back a bit in time. Hence +1 for removing unused HA implementations.
Cheers, Till On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 10:42 AM Zili Chen <wander4...@gmail.com> wrote: > Any suggestion? > > IMO it is exactly inactive for quite some time, we can remove these > uncompleted codes at least for now and re-introduce if needed. > > Best, > tison. > > > Zili Chen <wander4...@gmail.com> 于2019年9月27日周五 上午9:23写道： > > > Hi devs, > > > > Noticed that there are several stale & uncompleted high-availability > > services implementations, I > > start this thread in order to see whether or not we can remove them for a > > clean codebase work on > > the ongoing high-availability refactor effort[1]. > > > > Below are all of classes I noticed. > > > > - YarnHighAvailabilityServices > > - AbstractYarnNonHaServices > > - YarnIntraNonHaMasterServices > > - YarnPreConfiguredMasterNonHaServices > > - SingleLeaderElectionService > > - FsNegativeRunningJobsRegistry > > (as well as their dedicated tests) > > > > Any suggestion? > > Best, > > tison. > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-10333 > > >
