Stop cherry-picking patches to released branch
Hello, I believe that we should not cherry-pick changes to released branches (branch-2.x) if there is no strong reason to do it. I think that the only types of fixes that are eligible for cherry-picks are: - security issues - fixes for regressions - fixes for serious bugs (but the change is not likely to break other things or it does not need dependencies) Pulsar is widely used and any patch you add may make the branch unstable. New features or improvements should go only to the "master" branch. We do not cut releases very often, and it is better to have stable branches. We do not have strong quality assurance systems against the branches that are not the "master" branch, so it is very hard to say that a released branch is stable. Thoughts ? Enrico
Re: [ANNOUNCE] New Committer: Jiwei Guo
Congratulations！ guo jiwei 於 2021年11月22日 週一 14:17 寫道： > Thanks to the community and to all the people who have helped me. I will > continue to work hard. > > > Regards > Jiwei Guo (Tboy) > > > On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 2:07 PM Enrico Olivelli > wrote: > > > Congrats! > > > > Enrico > > > > Il Lun 22 Nov 2021, 05:35 PengHui Li ha scritto: > > > > > The Apache Pulsar Project Management Committee (PMC) has invited Jiwei > > Guo > > > https://github.com/Technoboy- to become a committer and we are pleased > > to > > > announce > > > that he has accepted. > > > > > > Jiwei has joined the community for more than 1 year now and he is > active > > > in the Pulsar community for more than 5 months, and he is a PMC member > of > > > Apache dolphinscheduler > > > https://dolphinscheduler.apache.org/en-us/community/team.html > > > > > > Welcome and Congratulations, Jiwei! > > > > > > Please join us in congratulating and welcoming Jiwei onboard! > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > Penghui Li on behalf of the Pulsar PMC > > > > > >
Re: [ANNOUNCE] New Committer: Jiwei Guo
Congratulations Thnaks ZhangJian He 陳智弘 于2021年11月22日周一 下午7:52写道： > Congratulations！ > > guo jiwei 於 2021年11月22日 週一 14:17 寫道： > > > Thanks to the community and to all the people who have helped me. I will > > continue to work hard. > > > > > > Regards > > Jiwei Guo (Tboy) > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 2:07 PM Enrico Olivelli > > wrote: > > > > > Congrats! > > > > > > Enrico > > > > > > Il Lun 22 Nov 2021, 05:35 PengHui Li ha scritto: > > > > > > > The Apache Pulsar Project Management Committee (PMC) has invited > Jiwei > > > Guo > > > > https://github.com/Technoboy- to become a committer and we are > pleased > > > to > > > > announce > > > > that he has accepted. > > > > > > > > Jiwei has joined the community for more than 1 year now and he is > > active > > > > in the Pulsar community for more than 5 months, and he is a PMC > member > > of > > > > Apache dolphinscheduler > > > > https://dolphinscheduler.apache.org/en-us/community/team.html > > > > > > > > Welcome and Congratulations, Jiwei! > > > > > > > > Please join us in congratulating and welcoming Jiwei onboard! > > > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Penghui Li on behalf of the Pulsar PMC > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Stop cherry-picking patches to released branch
Hi Enrico, I think we should cherry-pick the bug fixes, enhancements and test improvements? Only the new features and document should not cherry-pick release branch. And, do you see any issues introduced in release branch from the cherry-picking? Thanks, Penghui On Nov 22, 2021, 5:38 PM +0800, Enrico Olivelli , wrote: > Hello, > I believe that we should not cherry-pick changes to released branches > (branch-2.x) if there is no strong reason to do it. > > I think that the only types of fixes that are eligible for cherry-picks are: > - security issues > - fixes for regressions > - fixes for serious bugs (but the change is not likely to break other > things or it does not need dependencies) > > Pulsar is widely used and any patch you add may make the branch unstable. > New features or improvements should go only to the "master" branch. > > We do not cut releases very often, and it is better to have stable branches. > > We do not have strong quality assurance systems against the branches that > are not the "master" branch, > so it is very hard to say that a released branch is stable. > > Thoughts ? > > Enrico
RE: [DISCUSS] The processing of residual scheam and the convergence of schema operation auth
+1 Penghui On Nov 19, 2021, 2:29 AM +0800, Neng Lu , wrote: > +1 for dropping the schema when a topic is deleted by default. > > I previously met a strange error that after creating a topic with the same > name as previous deleted topic, the "ghost" schema is associated with the new > topic again and caused a lot of confusion for us. > > > On 2021/11/18 03:35:50 Ruguo Yu wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > > > After discussing with Penghui and HangChen about the consistency of topic > > and schema deletion, our preliminary conclusion is to drop the > > `--deleteSchema` parameter in `bin/pulsar-admin topics delete`, which can > > ensure the schema is deleted when the topic is deleted, and the default > > value is `true` on the broker side to be compatible with the lower version > > client’s deletion request. > > This change plan to be merged in the next major version release. What about > > your thoughts on this? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Ruguo Yu > > > > > > > > On 2021/11/14 14:14:52 yuruguo wrote: > > > > > Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > Currently, topic and schema are managed separately, and there will be a > > > situation, that is, the topic has been deleted but its schema still > > > exists. Should we deal with these residual schemas? For this problem I > > > created an issue[1]. > > > > > > > > > > In addition, the operation auth of the schema should also converge. To a > > > certain extent, it is related to the operation auth of topic. For this > > > problem I created an issue[2]. > > > > > > > > > > Regarding the two problems of the schema, please give guidance or a > > > better solution 😊 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/12795 > > > > > > > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/12419 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Ruguo Yu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
RE: [ANNOUNCE] New Committer: Jiwei Guo
Congratulations! Thanks, Ruguo Yu On 2021/11/22 04:35:08 PengHui Li wrote: > The Apache Pulsar Project Management Committee (PMC) has invited Jiwei Guo > https://github.com/Technoboy- to become a committer and we are pleased to > announce > that he has accepted. > > Jiwei has joined the community for more than 1 year now and he is active in > the Pulsar community for more than 5 months, and he is a PMC member of > Apache dolphinscheduler > https://dolphinscheduler.apache.org/en-us/community/team.html > > Welcome and Congratulations, Jiwei! > > Please join us in congratulating and welcoming Jiwei onboard! > > Best Regards, > Penghui Li on behalf of the Pulsar PMC >
Re: [ANNOUNCE] New Committer: Jiwei Guo
Congrats Jiwei! Ran On 2021/11/22 04:35:08 PengHui Li wrote: > The Apache Pulsar Project Management Committee (PMC) has invited Jiwei Guo > https://github.com/Technoboy- to become a committer and we are pleased to > announce > that he has accepted. > > Jiwei has joined the community for more than 1 year now and he is active in > the Pulsar community for more than 5 months, and he is a PMC member of > Apache dolphinscheduler > https://dolphinscheduler.apache.org/en-us/community/team.html > > Welcome and Congratulations, Jiwei! > > Please join us in congratulating and welcoming Jiwei onboard! > > Best Regards, > Penghui Li on behalf of the Pulsar PMC >
Re: [VOTE] Apache Pulsar 2.9.0 candidate 4
Hi Enrico, Thanks for your great work! We also make some chaos tests for 2.9.0 candidate 4. We opened a new Pulsar cluster based on 2.9.0-candidate-4 and injected some chaos experiments by chaos-mesh, such as broker pod failure, kill, and zookeeper pod failure, in this process, the entire Pulsar cluster could provide service normally, the producer and consumer could work continuously. But maybe the test is not very strict, we will improve it persistently. Thanks On 2021/11/17 13:04:52 Enrico Olivelli wrote: > This is the fourth release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.9.0. > > It fixes the following issues: > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/milestone/30?closed=1 > > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay open > for at least 72 hours *** > > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for > convenience. > > Source and binary files: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-2.9.0-candidate-4/ > > SHA-512 checksums: > > 659afa98e2475fc95f3126aab47d365e3e43a9d419c9cbe20c99520029f0b28aec2f471da5ccf47b92017a4c7943fc113a96232b075eb675e2b9df3601b2a7ad > apache-pulsar-2.9.0-SNAPSHOT-bin.tar.gz > ed93aa1b57411c5d153bcd1433db6679ddb9b4d23896b39c1a1ad8edc70aaa7e95842a5770d6d55b466ab90500e17f50549673601556e767f7c12135ae360e85 > apache-pulsar-2.9.0-SNAPSHOT-src.tar.gz > > Maven staging repo: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1104/ > > The tag to be voted upon: > v2.9.0-candidate-4 (bdd57b21a66b81aab72c4ec39d516ffd2a769c35) > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.9.0-candidate-4 > > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS > > Please download the source package, and follow the README to build > and run the Pulsar standalone service. > > Enrico Olivelli >
RE: [ANNOUNCE] New Committer: Jiwei Guo
Congratulations! --- Thanks Haiting Jiang On 2021/11/22 04:35:08 PengHui Li wrote: > The Apache Pulsar Project Management Committee (PMC) has invited Jiwei Guo > https://github.com/Technoboy- to become a committer and we are pleased to > announce > that he has accepted. > > Jiwei has joined the community for more than 1 year now and he is active in > the Pulsar community for more than 5 months, and he is a PMC member of > Apache dolphinscheduler > https://dolphinscheduler.apache.org/en-us/community/team.html > > Welcome and Congratulations, Jiwei! > > Please join us in congratulating and welcoming Jiwei onboard! > > Best Regards, > Penghui Li on behalf of the Pulsar PMC >
Re: [ANNOUNCE] New Committer: Jiwei Guo
Congratulations! Thanks for all of your hard work to Apache Pulsar and its community! Aaron On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 6:37 AM Ran Gao wrote: > Congrats Jiwei! > > Ran > > On 2021/11/22 04:35:08 PengHui Li wrote: > > The Apache Pulsar Project Management Committee (PMC) has invited Jiwei > Guo > > https://github.com/Technoboy- to become a committer and we are pleased > to > > announce > > that he has accepted. > > > > Jiwei has joined the community for more than 1 year now and he is active > in > > the Pulsar community for more than 5 months, and he is a PMC member of > > Apache dolphinscheduler > > https://dolphinscheduler.apache.org/en-us/community/team.html > > > > Welcome and Congratulations, Jiwei! > > > > Please join us in congratulating and welcoming Jiwei onboard! > > > > Best Regards, > > Penghui Li on behalf of the Pulsar PMC > > >
[GitHub] [pulsar-dotpulsar] PetterIsberg commented on issue #84: Recover after network disconnect
PetterIsberg commented on issue #84: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-dotpulsar/issues/84#issuecomment-975717538 @blankensteiner We're grateful that you take time to look into this and I'm sorry for not helping out on this further. I'm looking through the code now and can see that the client side ping has been implemented and my testing shows that the client is indeed sending pings. Is there however any action taken if the response to the ping is missing, i.e. no pong back from the server? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] New repository for website - pulsar-site
How might the planned move of various components and adaptors out of the main repository impact the choice to have the docs in the main repository? > On Nov 17, 2021, at 12:25 PM, Matteo Merli wrote: > > I agree with that. > > I understand that there are tradeoffs for each approach, though the > original intention was to allow for doc changes to be committed in the > same PR as the code change. That doesn't have to be the case always, > especially for larger multi-PR changes, but it makes it easier to do > quick corrections to the docs. > > I think the bigger problem here is to get rid of the generated site > HTML stuff from the main pulsar repo. > > -- > Matteo Merli > > > On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 12:16 PM Enrico Olivelli wrote: >> >> Dave, >> Having a new repo will make it harder for developers to contribute >> documentation. >> >> Usually engineers do it like and do not have time to write docs. >> >> If we ask them to create two PRs only to add, for instance, a new >> configuration option, then it would be somehow a pain. >> >> I am not saying that we shouldn't go this way, but it would be kind of a >> pain for someone and we need to ear more voices. >> >> Enrico >> >> Il Mer 17 Nov 2021, 19:28 Sijie Guo ha scritto: >> >>> I think we should have a PIP for this. Because this impacts all the >>> developers who are making documentation changes. >>> >>> - Sijie >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 8:46 AM Dave Fisher wrote: >>> Hi - There are two efforts happening in the community around website refresh. (1) Docusaurus upgrades. (2) New web design. There is an effort to eliminate all the extra commits in the asf-site branch of the main repository. In that thread I proposed a new repository for the website. We can then discuss migration and development both on this mailing list and as PRs and Issues in that repository. Do we want to have a PIP process here or can we be less formal? I think that PRs. Issues, and simple commits can be sufficient. Unless there are objections I will create a new repository - pulsar-site on Friday in 72 hours. ‘ Regards, Dave >>>
Re: [DISCUSS] New repository for website - pulsar-site
Il Gio 18 Nov 2021, 20:32 Dave Fisher ha scritto: > I’m making progress here, but I need help getting the pulsarbot GH secret > into the pulsar-site repository. > You have to open a INFRA ticket Enrico > If that secret can be shared directly to me then I can fully test before > adding my PR. > > Thanks, > Dave > > > On Nov 17, 2021, at 3:57 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > > > I’m going to work through > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/master/site2/README.md > > > > I’ll make sure that any changes related to the asf-site branch don’t > have issue with that. > > > > We may want to be able to publish alternative web designs to a staging > sites. > > > >> On Nov 17, 2021, at 3:02 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > >> > >> I’ve updated my fork of apache/pulsar > >> > >> I’m not seeing how to run the workflow "CI - Pulsar Website build”. Any > ideas? > >> > >> If not then I’m going to need to test locally and it will take some > time to ready it. > >> > >> > >>> On Nov 17, 2021, at 1:15 PM, Matteo Merli > wrote: > >>> > >>> Yes, that should work. > >>> > >>> After that we can go ahead and remove `asf-site` from the main repo, > >>> although we need to make it "unprotected" to be able to do so. > >> > >> Yes once we have moved over to the new then we can ask Infra to take > care of the branch protection along with deleting it. > >> > >> When I create the new repository I will copy all of the asf-site branch > which will take care of transferring the parts of the site not actively > being built. > > > > I have created the new repository and populated the asf-site branch: > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/tree/asf-site > > > > It publishes to a staging url which you can see here: > https://pulsar.staged.apache.org > > > > Once we are ready we alter: > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/blob/asf-site/.asf.yaml > > > > Per: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/git+-+.asf.yaml+features > > > >> > >> Regards, > >> Dave > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Matteo Merli > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 12:46 PM Dave Fisher wrote: > > If we change ORIGIN_REPO[1] to point to a new pulsar-site repos. > Then with the correct .asf.yaml file changes we can remove the > asf-site branch. > I see that the publish is run from this workflow [2] > Let me think about a PR to make the move. > > Regards, > Dave > > [1] > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/7a34cebca25e6e584e8b758e6bd58c1c4fe8a58e/site2/tools/publish-website.sh#L25 > [2] > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/master/.github/workflows/ci-pulsar-website-build.yaml > > > > On Nov 17, 2021, at 12:31 PM, Matteo Merli > wrote: > > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/master/site2/tools/publish-website.sh > > > > > > -- > > Matteo Merli > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 12:29 PM Dave Fisher > wrote: > >> > >> Show me where the code is that commits to the asf-site branch. > >> > >>> On Nov 17, 2021, at 12:25 PM, Matteo Merli > wrote: > >>> > >>> I agree with that. > >>> > >>> I understand that there are tradeoffs for each approach, though the > >>> original intention was to allow for doc changes to be committed in > the > >>> same PR as the code change. That doesn't have to be the case > always, > >>> especially for larger multi-PR changes, but it makes it easier to > do > >>> quick corrections to the docs. > >>> > >>> I think the bigger problem here is to get rid of the generated site > >>> HTML stuff from the main pulsar repo. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Matteo Merli > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 12:16 PM Enrico Olivelli < > eolive...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Dave, > Having a new repo will make it harder for developers to contribute > documentation. > > Usually engineers do it like and do not have time to write docs. > > If we ask them to create two PRs only to add, for instance, a new > configuration option, then it would be somehow a pain. > > I am not saying that we shouldn't go this way, but it would be > kind of a > pain for someone and we need to ear more voices. > > Enrico > > Il Mer 17 Nov 2021, 19:28 Sijie Guo ha > scritto: > > > I think we should have a PIP for this. Because this impacts all > the > > developers who are making documentation changes. > > > > - Sijie > > > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 8:46 AM Dave Fisher > wrote: > > > >> Hi - > >> > >> There are two efforts happening in the community around website > refresh. > >> > >> (1) Docusaurus upgrades. > >> (2) New web design. > >> > >> There is an effort to eliminate all the extra commits in the > asf-site
Re: [VOTE] Apache Pulsar 2.9.0 candidate 4
+1 (binding) Follow the "Release Candidate Validation": - start standalone - create tenants and namespaces - publish and consume messages - cassandra connector - function and stateful function Done the performance test, no performance degradation. Best regards Penghui On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 10:51 PM Ran Gao wrote: > Hi Enrico, > > Thanks for your great work! > > We also make some chaos tests for 2.9.0 candidate 4. > > We opened a new Pulsar cluster based on 2.9.0-candidate-4 and injected > some chaos experiments by chaos-mesh, such as broker pod failure, kill, and > zookeeper pod failure, in this process, the entire Pulsar cluster could > provide service normally, the producer and consumer could work > continuously. But maybe the test is not very strict, we will improve it > persistently. > > Thanks > > > On 2021/11/17 13:04:52 Enrico Olivelli wrote: > > This is the fourth release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.9.0. > > > > It fixes the following issues: > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/milestone/30?closed=1 > > > > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay > open > > for at least 72 hours *** > > > > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for > > convenience. > > > > Source and binary files: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-2.9.0-candidate-4/ > > > > SHA-512 checksums: > > > > > 659afa98e2475fc95f3126aab47d365e3e43a9d419c9cbe20c99520029f0b28aec2f471da5ccf47b92017a4c7943fc113a96232b075eb675e2b9df3601b2a7ad > > apache-pulsar-2.9.0-SNAPSHOT-bin.tar.gz > > > ed93aa1b57411c5d153bcd1433db6679ddb9b4d23896b39c1a1ad8edc70aaa7e95842a5770d6d55b466ab90500e17f50549673601556e767f7c12135ae360e85 > > apache-pulsar-2.9.0-SNAPSHOT-src.tar.gz > > > > Maven staging repo: > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1104/ > > > > The tag to be voted upon: > > v2.9.0-candidate-4 (bdd57b21a66b81aab72c4ec39d516ffd2a769c35) > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.9.0-candidate-4 > > > > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS > > > > Please download the source package, and follow the README to build > > and run the Pulsar standalone service. > > > > Enrico Olivelli > > >
Re: [VOTE] Apache Pulsar 2.9.0 candidate 4
+1 binding Checked: * Signatures * Bin distribution: - NOTICE, README, LICENSE - Start standalone service and producer/consumer test * Src distribution: - NOTICE, README, LICENSE - Compile and unit tests - Start standalone service * Checked staging maven repository artifacts -- Matteo Merli On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 4:50 PM PengHui Li wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > Follow the "Release Candidate Validation": > > - start standalone > - create tenants and namespaces > - publish and consume messages > - cassandra connector > - function and stateful function > > Done the performance test, no performance degradation. > > Best regards > Penghui > > > > On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 10:51 PM Ran Gao wrote: > > > Hi Enrico, > > > > Thanks for your great work! > > > > We also make some chaos tests for 2.9.0 candidate 4. > > > > We opened a new Pulsar cluster based on 2.9.0-candidate-4 and injected > > some chaos experiments by chaos-mesh, such as broker pod failure, kill, and > > zookeeper pod failure, in this process, the entire Pulsar cluster could > > provide service normally, the producer and consumer could work > > continuously. But maybe the test is not very strict, we will improve it > > persistently. > > > > Thanks > > > > > > On 2021/11/17 13:04:52 Enrico Olivelli wrote: > > > This is the fourth release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.9.0. > > > > > > It fixes the following issues: > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/milestone/30?closed=1 > > > > > > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay > > open > > > for at least 72 hours *** > > > > > > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for > > > convenience. > > > > > > Source and binary files: > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-2.9.0-candidate-4/ > > > > > > SHA-512 checksums: > > > > > > > > 659afa98e2475fc95f3126aab47d365e3e43a9d419c9cbe20c99520029f0b28aec2f471da5ccf47b92017a4c7943fc113a96232b075eb675e2b9df3601b2a7ad > > > apache-pulsar-2.9.0-SNAPSHOT-bin.tar.gz > > > > > ed93aa1b57411c5d153bcd1433db6679ddb9b4d23896b39c1a1ad8edc70aaa7e95842a5770d6d55b466ab90500e17f50549673601556e767f7c12135ae360e85 > > > apache-pulsar-2.9.0-SNAPSHOT-src.tar.gz > > > > > > Maven staging repo: > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1104/ > > > > > > The tag to be voted upon: > > > v2.9.0-candidate-4 (bdd57b21a66b81aab72c4ec39d516ffd2a769c35) > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.9.0-candidate-4 > > > > > > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release: > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS > > > > > > Please download the source package, and follow the README to build > > > and run the Pulsar standalone service. > > > > > > Enrico Olivelli > > > > >
