Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.10.1 Candidate 1

Hang, Il giorno lun 27 giu 2022 alle ore 03:55 Hang Chen ha scritto: > > Hi Penghui, > Thanks for your great work! > > I found two problems with this candidate, I'm not sure whether it will > block this release. > - There are some CVEs in this candidate. Please refer to: > https://gith

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.9.3 Candidate 1

Hang, Il giorno lun 27 giu 2022 alle ore 04:35 Hang Chen ha scritto: > > Hi Mattison, > Thanks for your great work! > > I found one problem with this candidate. > - When I import `pulsar-broker` and `managed-ledger` into my > project, I found the project build failed with the following >

[DISCUSS] PIP-181: Pulsar Shell

Hi all, I opened a new PIP about Pulsar CLI tools. Looking forward to seeing comments and suggestions. PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/16250 I posted a short video that shows how the new tool will work: https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/23314389/176125261-35e123a1-1826-4553-

[GitHub] [pulsar-site] MMirelli opened a new pull request, #126: Update out-of-sync link to get openssl.cnf

MMirelli opened a new pull request, #126: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/126 Static files were remove from pulsar repo by https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/15636. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] abtqian commented on issue #267: helm chart for pulsar version 2.10.0

abtqian commented on issue #267: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/issues/267#issuecomment-1168457653 @michaeljmarshall It seems that PR https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/266 has updated security config for zk and bookie. For pulsar broker, does it need the sa

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.10.1 Candidate 1

Thanks for Enrico's help, after importing the following dependency, it works for me now. ``` org.apache.pulsar pulsar ${pulsar.version} import pom ``` +1 (binding) - Build from source code, and run the license check - Import the published jar into my project, and works for

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.9.3 Candidate 1

> > @mattison It's better to upload the image under your org first so that we > can verify the image Sure, I will do it later. Best, Mattison On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 15:57, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > Hang, > > Il giorno lun 27 giu 2022 alle ore 04:35 Hang Chen > ha scritto: > > > > Hi Mattison,

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.9.3 Candidate 1

> > I found one problem with this candidate. > - When I import `pulsar-broker` and `managed-ledger` into my > project, I found the project build failed with the following > exceptions. Hi, Hang. According to the release 2.10.1 vote email, it looks like this problem gets solved and won't bloc

Re: [DISCUSS] Reject partitioned topic creation when the topic name contains the `partition` keyword.

I hope everyone can express their views. :) Best, Mattison

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.10.1 Candidate 1

Thanks, Hang and Enrico. Close the vote with 3 (+1) bindings, 5 (+1) non-bindings. I will continue the release process. Penghui On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 6:15 PM Hang Chen wrote: > Thanks for Enrico's help, after importing the following dependency, it > works for me now. > ``` > > org.apac

Re: [DISCUSS] Enable GitHub Discussions?

Hi Dave Fisher, any thoughts on enabling GitHub Discussions? Thank you. On 2022/06/27 02:41:12 Yu wrote: > +1 for enabling the GitHub Discussion as I proposed before. > > At that time, the main concern was not able to sync info between GitHub > Discussion and Mailing List. Since the concern can b

Re: [DISCUSS] Reject partitioned topic creation when the topic name contains the `partition` keyword.

Hi, I think the topic name of DLQ is a bit awkward now, should use `xxx-sub-name-DLQ-patition-0` instead of `xxx-sub-name-patition-0-DLQ`. Thanks, Baodi Shi > On Jun 28, 2022, at 20:3314, mattison chao wrote: > > I hope everyone can express their views. :) > > Best, > Mattison

Re: [DISCUSS] Enable GitHub Discussions?

Hi - Now that the ASF has a notifier on GitHub Discussions I have no objection to using discussions as long as these are visible on dev@pulsar.apache.org mailing list. > From the previous thread it seems that the Pulsar community has already > multiple channels to

[GitHub] [pulsar-site] urfreespace commented on pull request #126: Update out-of-sync url to get openssl.cnf in TLS transport documentation

urfreespace commented on PR #126: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/126#issuecomment-1169447282 hi @MMirelli, thanks for your contribution, but please make pr about docs change in repo `pulsar` https://github.com/apache/pulsar/tree/master/site2, this repo `pulsar-site` will au

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-180: Shadow Topic, an alternative way to support readonly topic ownership.

Hi Penghui & Asaf: Please allow me to provide some more detailes about **metadata** synchronization between source topic and shadow topic. 1.When shadow topic initializes, it will read from metadata store path "/managed-ledgers/{source_topic_ledger_name}", which contains all the managed ledge

[GitHub] [pulsar-site] horizonzy opened a new pull request, #127: Fix the doc link mismatch problem.

horizonzy opened a new pull request, #127: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/127 fixes- https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/14928. Now the rest-api website url is: https://pulsar.apache.org/admin-rest-api/?version=@pulsar:version_number@&apiversion=v2#operation/h

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-180: Shadow Topic, an alternative way to support readonly topic ownership.

Hi Haiting, Thanks for the explanation. I'm clear for now. Pulsar functions also can do such things by connecting data from one topic to another topic. But the difference is this proposal only copies the data to the cache of another topic, and the data not in the cache is also available by readin

[DISCUSS] Releasing Pulsar-client-go 0.9.0

Hello Everyone: I hope you’ve all been doing well. In the past couple of months, we have fixed many bugs and added some new features for the pulsar-client-go. For more information, refer to: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-go/milestone/10?closed=1 For that reason, let us start the rele

Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing Pulsar-client-go 0.9.0

+1 On 2022/06/29 06:06:01 Rui Fu wrote: > Hello Everyone: > > I hope you’ve all been doing well. In the past couple of months, we have > fixed many bugs and added some new features for the pulsar-client-go. For > more information, refer to: > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-go/milest

[GitHub] [pulsar-manager] gurleen-gks opened a new issue, #470: Pulsar manager does not support x509 cert and key for tls

gurleen-gks opened a new issue, #470: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-manager/issues/470 Only supports keystore ``` tls.enabled=false tls.keystore=keystore-file tls.keystore.password=keystore-file-password tls.hostname.verifier=false ``` -- This is an automated

Re: [DISCUSS] Reject partitioned topic creation when the topic name contains the `partition` keyword.

Hi Mattison, I did a quick reading and verify the PR on standalone, and I have a question: If the topic name contains `-partition-`, it is expected to reject to create a partitioned topic. However it will auto-create a non-partition topic with `-partition-`. But our `allowAutoTopicCreationType` i

[GitHub] [pulsar-site] urfreespace merged pull request #127: Fix the doc link mismatch problem.

urfreespace merged PR #127: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/127 -- 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.a

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-180: Shadow Topic, an alternative way to support readonly topic ownership.

Hi Dave, On 2022/06/23 03:59:35 Dave Fisher wrote: > > On Jun 21, 2022, at 1:00 AM, Haiting Jiang wrote: > > > > Hi Pulsar community: > > > > I open a pip to discuss "Shadow Topic, an alternative way to support > > readonly topic ownership." > > > > Proposal Link: https://github.com/apache/

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-180: Shadow Topic, an alternative way to support readonly topic ownership.

Hi Penghui On 2022/06/29 04:07:35 PengHui Li wrote: > Hi Haiting, > > Thanks for the explanation. I'm clear for now. > > Pulsar functions also can do such things by connecting data from one topic > to another topic. > But the difference is this proposal only copies the data to the cache of > ano