Thanks for your reply Till. I will wait a bit for other thoughts, and create JIRA and start progress if no further objections.
Best, tison. Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> 于2019年9月30日周一 下午5:51写道： > 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 > > > > > >
