> On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote: > > Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.
Encouraged :) > Details: > According to the Apache voting process there are binding and non-binding > votes. The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones that count > officially. However, not officially, votes from the community hold a lot of > weight. > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html> > > -Bryan > > > > >> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <shrihari.kal...@riverbed.com> >> wrote: >> >> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed to :) >> -0 >> Thanks, >> Shrihari >> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation. However, I >>> don¹t think any are major issues. Your feedback is very important in the >>> decision on whether to keep this feature. >>> >>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them: >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%2 >>> 0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22coll >>> ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC >>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project% >>> 20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22collati >>> on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC> >>> >>> -Bryan >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar >>>> <shrihari.kal...@riverbed.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey guys, >>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried using >>>> log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to work >>>> reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen many bugs >>>> in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around? >>>> Thanks, >>>> Shrihari >>>> >>>> >>>> From: Phil Sorber <sor...@apache.org <mailto:sor...@apache.org>> >>>> Reply-To: "us...@trafficserver.apache.org >>>> <mailto:us...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <us...@trafficserver.apache.org >>>> <mailto:us...@trafficserver.apache.org>> >>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM >>>> To: "us...@trafficserver.apache.org >>>> <mailto:us...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <us...@trafficserver.apache.org >>>> <mailto:us...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, "dev@trafficserver.apache.org >>>> <mailto:dev@trafficserver.apache.org>" <dev@trafficserver.apache.org >>>> <mailto:dev@trafficserver.apache.org>> >>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0 >>>> >>>>> +0 >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpe...@apache.org >>>>> <mailto:jpe...@apache.org>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.c...@gmail.com >>>>>> <mailto:bryan.c...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0 >>>>>> release. If you are using these features and require them, please >>>>>> respond to this email. We also need to have people that are willing >>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features. Your >>>>>> feedback is very important! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and >>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation. Here is the >>>>>> documentation for log collation: >>>>>>> >>>>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/ >>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html >>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring >>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html> >>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring >>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html >>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring >>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics, >>>>>> and code for log collation. >>>>>> >>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif. >>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an >>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the >>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0 >>>>>> >>>>>> J >>> >> >
