faster iteration definitely helps early-stage projects. +1
Best, Yuan On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 4:14 PM Congxian Qiu <qcx978132...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 from my side to have smaller and more frequent feature releases for the > project in its early phases. > > Best, > Congxian > > > Marta Paes Moreira <ma...@ververica.com> 于2020年5月21日周四 下午12:49写道： > > > +1 for more frequent releases with a shorter (but feedback-informed) > > feature set. > > > > Thanks, Gordon (and Igal)! > > > > Marta > > > > On Thu, 21 May 2020 at 03:44, Yu Li <car...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > +1, it makes a lot of sense for stateful functions to evolve faster. > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > Yu > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 20 May 2020 at 23:36, Zhijiang <wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com > > > .invalid> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I also like this idea, considering stateful functions flexible enough > > to > > > > have a faster release cycle. +1 from my side. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Zhijiang > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > From:Seth Wiesman <sjwies...@gmail.com> > > > > Send Time:2020年5月20日(星期三) 21:45 > > > > To:dev <dev@flink.apache.org> > > > > Subject:Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing Stateful Functions 2.1.0 soon? > > > > > > > > +1 for a fast release cycle > > > > > > > > Seth > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 8:43 AM Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I like the idea of releasing Statefun more frequently to have > faster > > > > > feedback cycles! > > > > > > > > > > No objections for releasing 2.1.0 from my side. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 2:22 PM Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai < > > > tzuli...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi devs, > > > > > > > > > > > > Since Stateful Functions 2.0 was released early April, > > > > > > we've been getting some good feedback from various channels, > > > > > > including the Flink mailing lists, JIRA issues, as well as Stack > > > > Overflow > > > > > > questions. > > > > > > > > > > > > Some of the discussions have actually translated into new > features > > > > > > currently being implemented into the project, such as: > > > > > > > > > > > > - State TTL for the state primitives in Stateful Functions > (for > > > both > > > > > > embedded/remote functions) > > > > > > - Transport for remote functions via UNIX domain sockets, > which > > > > would > > > > > be > > > > > > useful when remote functions are co-located with Flink > StateFun > > > > > workers > > > > > > (i.e. the "sidecar" deployment mode) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Besides that, some critical shortcomings have already been > > addressed > > > > > since > > > > > > the last release: > > > > > > > > > > > > - After upgrading to Flink 1.10.1, failure recovery in > Stateful > > > > > > Functions now works properly with the new scheduler. > > > > > > - Support for concurrent checkpoints > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With these ongoing threads, while it's only been just short of 2 > > > months > > > > > > since the last release, > > > > > > we (Igal Shilman and I) have been thinking about aiming to > already > > > > start > > > > > > the next feature release (2.1.0) soon. > > > > > > This is relatively shorter than the release cycle of what the > > > community > > > > > is > > > > > > used to in Flink (usually 3 months at least), > > > > > > but we think with the StateFun project in its early phases, > having > > > > > smaller > > > > > > and more frequent feature releases could potentially help drive > > user > > > > > > adoption. > > > > > > > > > > > > So, what do you think about setting feature freeze for StateFun > > 2.1.0 > > > > by > > > > > > next Wednesday (May 27th)? > > > > > > Of course, whether or not to actually have another feature > release > > > > > already > > > > > > is still an open discussion - if you prefer a richer feature > > release > > > > with > > > > > > more features included besides the ones listed above, please do > > > > comment! > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Gordon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
