+1 (non binding)
Checks done:
- Validated checksums and signatures
- Compiled from source w/ JDK11
- Ran Pulsar standalone and produced-consumed from CLI and validated Java
functions
Andras
On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 4:08 PM PengHui Li wrote:
> This is the first release candidate for Apache Pu
cmodi-cogito commented on pull request #235:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/235#issuecomment-1047613900
@lhotari can you merge this ?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL abo
Hi everyone,
Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 1.6.0,
as follows:
[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar Node.js client,
version 1.6.0.
It fixes the fo
Hi all,
I want to start a discussion for cherry-picking topic compaction fixes[1]
into branch-2.7.
Mainly based on the following considerations:
1. Without these fixes, the reader will skip data from the compacted topic
2. The compactor might skip some data which introduced data lost in some
case
Sorry, the wrong link was provided in the last email.
[1]
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.7.6+is%3Aclosed+label%3Acomponent%2Fcompaction+-label%3Acherry-picked%2Fbranch-2.7+
Penghui
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 9:57 PM PengHui Li wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I want to s
bsheltonihs commented on pull request #236:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/236#issuecomment-1047888370
I believe that I have made the needed changes for it to be backwards
compatible.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the m
frankjkelly commented on a change in pull request #236:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/236#discussion_r812069495
##
File path: charts/pulsar/values.yaml
##
@@ -777,6 +777,8 @@ broker:
functions:
component: functions-worker
+ limit_to_namespace: fal
cmodi-cogito commented on pull request #235:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/235#issuecomment-1047925969
@sijie what are next steps for this PR to be merged ?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to Gi
bsheltonihs commented on a change in pull request #236:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/236#discussion_r812129671
##
File path: charts/pulsar/values.yaml
##
@@ -777,6 +777,8 @@ broker:
functions:
component: functions-worker
+ limit_to_namespace: fal
bsheltonihs commented on a change in pull request #236:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/236#discussion_r812135669
##
File path: charts/pulsar/values.yaml
##
@@ -777,6 +777,8 @@ broker:
functions:
component: functions-worker
+ limit_to_namespace: fal
sijie commented on a change in pull request #236:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/236#discussion_r812291367
##
File path: charts/pulsar/values.yaml
##
@@ -776,6 +776,11 @@ broker:
##
functions:
component: functions-worker
+ ## Pulsar: Functions Worke
bsheltonihs commented on a change in pull request #236:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/236#discussion_r812296075
##
File path: charts/pulsar/values.yaml
##
@@ -776,6 +776,11 @@ broker:
##
functions:
component: functions-worker
+ ## Pulsar: Functions
It was released correctly, same as all the prev releases:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/pulsar/pulsar-client-go-0.8.0/
--
Matteo Merli
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 1:03 PM Enrico Olivelli wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Did you store the source code tarball on the dist.apache.org website?
>
> For a val
I found a breaking change in version 2.9.2
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14409
The change is introduced by https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12786
Policies.is_allow_auto_update_schema changed from boolean to Boolean, this may
cause user's code get NPE.
I'd like to start a discusstio
Hi Aparajita,
Thanks for the proposal. Indeed the schema registry was meant to be
pluggable since the beginning although we skipped the actual
"plugging" part. It would be good to actually see multiple
implementations there.
I don't see any risk in this proposal and it's a good time to make
break
Looks it will affect the 2.8.3 and 2.10.0 releases,
> We could add a new interface with `applied` parameter, but this also
introduce inevitable break change.
And I suggest to do this with PIP in the next major version release.
For version 2.9.2, we need merge 14409 to avoid return null value.
htt
Hi all,
This PR https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14410 fixes a breaking change
in 2.10.0,
without this fix, if users enabled the debug level log and only upgrade the
broker but not the clients,
we will get exception.
I will cherry-pick this one to branch-2.10 and rollout a new RC for 2.10.0.
Hi -
Has anyone else found another breaking issue?
Just asking to save Peng Hui time if there is another fix for RC2,
All the best,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 22, 2022, at 8:31 PM, PengHui Li wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> This PR https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14410 fixes a breaking
Yu - Thank you for driving that!
- Sijie
On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 11:06 PM Yu wrote:
> Hi Sijie,
>
> Thanks for your timely response.
> We're looking into multi-language support and other known issues.
> Will keep the community updated once we make progress.
>
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 1:07 AM S
Thanks Dave,
Yes, this is also what I want to ask, I have checked all the current opened
PRs and the current merged PRs
Looks no other related breaking change fixes. I think we'd better keep the
VOTE open for 2 days?
Thanks,
Penghui
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 1:03 PM Dave Fisher wrote:
> Hi -
>
>
Hi All,
In my recent PR to update the `.asf.yaml` to protect release branches,
I set the `dismiss_stale_reviews` to `true` for PRs targeting master
branch [0]. I mistakenly thought this setting would only dismiss PRs
updated by force. Instead, all approvals are dismissed when additional
commits ar
+1
Before I always thought it was Github added this new feature :)
Thanks for sharing the great knowledge.
Penghui
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 2:24 PM Michael Marshall
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> In my recent PR to update the `.asf.yaml` to protect release branches,
> I set the `dismiss_stale_reviews` to
Thank you all for your votes.
As discussed in the 2.9.3 release vote thread, this release candidate
is affected by a breaking change that will be fixed by
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14409. Please see that thread
for details.
Please let me know if anyone has identified additional regres
Il Mar 22 Feb 2022, 22:55 Matteo Merli ha scritto:
> It was released correctly, same as all the prev releases:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/pulsar/pulsar-client-go-0.8.0/
Thanks
Enrico
> --
> Matteo Merli
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 1:03 PM Enrico Olivelli
> wrote:
> >
> >
Hi Yutao,
Thanks for your feedback.
Yes, the current implementation is the marker approach.
And the transaction buffer is an interface, in fact, this
does not limit we can only have one approach.
When we implement the sidecar approach, the biggest
challenge is mapping the message ID to the entry
larshp opened a new issue #195:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-node/issues/195
Hi,
There are multiple parameter settings for the ClientConfig,
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-node/blob/d2c0d1e374f8e9f25934bd679436da0872b6bc8e/index.d.ts#L25-L33
Is the docu
26 matches
Mail list logo
