There are a number of great new features that are in trunk or about to
be committed to trunk. I'm proposing that we do a 3.5.0 release in
February, I volunteer to be the release manager.

As RM I plan to do 3.5.0 as an alpha release with an extended voting
period. Perhaps 2 weeks rather than the standard 3 days. We'd then
iterate rapidly on reported issues to transition to beta and finally
stable releases. Similar to what we did with 3.4.

Some pending features:
1) Need to finish up the dynamic reconfig support.
2) Facebook has contributed a number of scalability improvements. They
are planning to add local sessions, I'd like to include that and any
other features that they might provide in the timeframe.

There are only 4 jiras marked as blockers for 3.5.0 currently.
ZOOKEEPER-1551 looks the most serious.

There are a number of patch available jiras that we've been whittling
down, we'd try to include as many of those as can be completed in the
timeframe.
What do you think?

Patrick

I don't want to be a blocker for 3.5.0 but I'd love to make sure Curator is at minimum compatible with 3.5.0 and at best incorporates any new features. Do folks have thoughts on the best way to do this?

-JZ

> 1) Need to finish up the dynamic reconfig support.

What's missing is only a few basic C API tests. Michi & Marshall are
looking into it, but if they doen't find time, I can try to write
those in mid January. Michi also reviewed the C client API. Ben
reviewed the Java client and server changes. It would be awesome if
others review as well.

Thanks,
Alex
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Patrick Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are a number of great new features that are in trunk or about to
> be committed to trunk. I'm proposing that we do a 3.5.0 release in
> February, I volunteer to be the release manager.
>
> As RM I plan to do 3.5.0 as an alpha release with an extended voting
> period. Perhaps 2 weeks rather than the standard 3 days. We'd then
> iterate rapidly on reported issues to transition to beta and finally
> stable releases. Similar to what we did with 3.4.
>
> Some pending features:
> 1) Need to finish up the dynamic reconfig support.
> 2) Facebook has contributed a number of scalability improvements. They
> are planning to add local sessions, I'd like to include that and any
> other features that they might provide in the timeframe.
>
> There are only 4 jiras marked as blockers for 3.5.0 currently.
> ZOOKEEPER-1551 looks the most serious.
>
> There are a number of patch available jiras that we've been whittling
> down, we'd try to include as many of those as can be completed in the
> timeframe.
>
>
> What do you think?
>
> Patrick

Here are the issues marked as feature/improvement in 3.5.0:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ZOOKEEPER%20AND%20issuetype%20in%20(Improvement%2C%20%22New%20Feature%22)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%223.5.0%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed%2C%20%22Patch%20Available%22)%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC

here are the java client specific ones:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ZOOKEEPER%20AND%20issuetype%20in%20(Improvement%2C%20%22New%20Feature%22)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%223.5.0%22%20AND%20component%20%3D%20%22java%20client%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed%2C%20%22Patch%20Available%22)%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC

The new create method which returns stat (1297) might be something you
should take advantage of?

Patrick

On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Jordan Zimmerman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't want to be a blocker for 3.5.0 but I'd love to make sure Curator is at minimum compatible with 3.5.0 and at best incorporates any new features. Do folks have thoughts on the best way to do this?
>
> -JZ
>

On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Alexander Shraer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 1) Need to finish up the dynamic reconfig support.
>
> What's missing is only a few basic C API tests. Michi & Marshall are
> looking into it, but if they doen't find time, I can try to write
> those in mid January. Michi also reviewed the C client API. Ben
> reviewed the Java client and server changes. It would be awesome if
> others review as well.
>

Sounds great Alex, thanks!

Note: You (community members) don't need to be a committer to provide
review feedback. (hint hint)

Actually it's a great way to learn more about the code and work
towards becoming a committer.

Patrick
>
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Patrick Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There are a number of great new features that are in trunk or about to
>> be committed to trunk. I'm proposing that we do a 3.5.0 release in
>> February, I volunteer to be the release manager.
>>
>> As RM I plan to do 3.5.0 as an alpha release with an extended voting
>> period. Perhaps 2 weeks rather than the standard 3 days. We'd then
>> iterate rapidly on reported issues to transition to beta and finally
>> stable releases. Similar to what we did with 3.4.
>>
>> Some pending features:
>> 1) Need to finish up the dynamic reconfig support.
>> 2) Facebook has contributed a number of scalability improvements. They
>> are planning to add local sessions, I'd like to include that and any
>> other features that they might provide in the timeframe.
>>
>> There are only 4 jiras marked as blockers for 3.5.0 currently.
>> ZOOKEEPER-1551 looks the most serious.
>>
>> There are a number of patch available jiras that we've been whittling
>> down, we'd try to include as many of those as can be completed in the
>> timeframe.
>>
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Patrick

Hi folks, a n00b speaking here.

I have been working on ZOOKEEPER-1423 during the latest week and it's
working like a charm. :) I only need to include tests, but I will be ready
to upload the patch early this week, I guess.

In addition, I have been worked on two zkCli related issues (ZOOKEEPER-1535,
ZOOKEEPER-1379), with patches already uploaded, while I try to find my way
through  doc generation process to address ZOOKEEPER-1488
(work-in-progress). It would be nice if some of this stuff could be
included in 3.5 release as we'd have a whole month to test it.

Best regards,
Edward

On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Patrick Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Alexander Shraer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >> 1) Need to finish up the dynamic reconfig support.
> >
> > What's missing is only a few basic C API tests. Michi & Marshall are
> > looking into it, but if they doen't find time, I can try to write
> > those in mid January. Michi also reviewed the C client API. Ben
> > reviewed the Java client and server changes. It would be awesome if
> > others review as well.
> >
>
> Sounds great Alex, thanks!
>
> Note: You (community members) don't need to be a committer to provide
> review feedback. (hint hint)
>
> Actually it's a great way to learn more about the code and work
> towards becoming a committer.
>
> Patrick
>
>
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Patrick Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> There are a number of great new features that are in trunk or about to
> >> be committed to trunk. I'm proposing that we do a 3.5.0 release in
> >> February, I volunteer to be the release manager.
> >>
> >> As RM I plan to do 3.5.0 as an alpha release with an extended voting
> >> period. Perhaps 2 weeks rather than the standard 3 days. We'd then
> >> iterate rapidly on reported issues to transition to beta and finally
> >> stable releases. Similar to what we did with 3.4.
> >>
> >> Some pending features:
> >> 1) Need to finish up the dynamic reconfig support.
> >> 2) Facebook has contributed a number of scalability improvements. They
> >> are planning to add local sessions, I'd like to include that and any
> >> other features that they might provide in the timeframe.
> >>
> >> There are only 4 jiras marked as blockers for 3.5.0 currently.
> >> ZOOKEEPER-1551 looks the most serious.
> >>
> >> There are a number of patch available jiras that we've been whittling
> >> down, we'd try to include as many of those as can be completed in the
> >> timeframe.
> >>
> >>
> >> What do you think?
> >>
> >> Patrick
>

It would be helpful if RCs/Betas were pushed to Maven Central as early as possible. It's difficult to develop against 3.5 without easy (i.e. Maven) access to binaries.

-JZ