Hi,
We hope to release 0.92 RC0 this Friday.
But that is not deadline. I (and other committers) would work over the
weekend if necessary.

For any patch, please wait for HadoopQA to get around. Basically Ubuntu may
give you some surprise even if you have run test suite yourself.
If you don't see 'Too many open files' for the failed tests reported by
PreCommit builds, take a further look.

There is no need to rush patches in.

Thanks

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Ted Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> We hope to release 0.92 RC0 this Friday.

Question: what are the Hadoop [pre]releases you'll be targeting? If there's
more than one, what are the priorities?

Thanks,
Roman.

I would say 0.20.205 and 0.22
Just personal opinion.

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 11:32 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Ted Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > We hope to release 0.92 RC0 this Friday.
>
> Question: what are the Hadoop [pre]releases you'll be targeting? If there's
> more than one, what are the priorities?
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>

Roman,

To my understanding:

0.20.205 is the important Apache release.
HBase users will also be able to continue using CDH3, which is common.

There was also some work to insure that we compile and run against 0.22, but I don't think anyone would actually deploy and use such a configuration.

Best regards,
  - Andy
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
----- Original Message -----
> From: Ted Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc:
> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2011 12:03 PM
> Subject: Re: proper pace for JIRA integration
>
> I would say 0.20.205 and 0.22
> Just personal opinion.
>
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 11:32 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>  On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Ted Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>  > Hi,
>>  > We hope to release 0.92 RC0 this Friday.
>>
>>  Question: what are the Hadoop [pre]releases you'll be targeting? If
>> there's more than one, what are the priorities?
>>
>>  Thanks,
>>  Roman.
>>
>

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There was also some work to insure that we compile and run against 0.22, but I don't think anyone would actually deploy and use such a configuration.

There will be some deployment of .22 in big shops as far as I know. Whether they
will also deploy HBase .92 or something else on top of it -- that
remains to be seen.

Well, my question was basically about what post .21 release of Hadoop HBase
.92 might be interested in supporting out of the box and it looks like
the answer is
.22. I'll setup an integration validation job over here and will
report the results:
    http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Hadoop%200.22/
(btw, once Bigtop 0.2.0 gets release we'll have a trunk that can
support 0.20.205 + .92).

Of course, we can all benefit from more integration tests available in
Bigtop, so if the community
could donate some of the integration tests, that I'm sure folks tend
to have in various
forms, that'll make it even easier for us to assess how healthy .92 is.

Thanks,
Roman.

> There will be some deployment of .22 in big shops as far as I know. 

Who are these "big shops"?

AFAIK, compared to 0.20.x or 0.23, 0.22 has a number of regressions.

We need to assess how healthy 0.22 is. How much time/attention should the HBase community pay to what might be a DoA/ignored release? Or is that in fact the case (that it is DoA...)?

Best regards,

  - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
>________________________________
>From: Roman Shaposhnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2011 12:51 PM
>Subject: Re: proper pace for JIRA integration
>
>On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There was also some work to insure that we compile and run against 0.22, but I don't think anyone would actually deploy and use such a configuration.
>
>There will be some deployment of .22 in big shops as far as I know. Whether they
>will also deploy HBase .92 or something else on top of it -- that
>remains to be seen.
>
>Well, my question was basically about what post .21 release of Hadoop HBase
>.92 might be interested in supporting out of the box and it looks like
>the answer is
>.22. I'll setup an integration validation job over here and will
>report the results:
>    http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Hadoop%200.22/
>(btw, once Bigtop 0.2.0 gets release we'll have a trunk that can
>support 0.20.205 + .92).
>
>Of course, we can all benefit from more integration tests available in
>Bigtop, so if the community
>could donate some of the integration tests, that I'm sure folks tend
>to have in various
>forms, that'll make it even easier for us to assess how healthy .92 is.
>
>Thanks,
>Roman.
>
>
> 

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There will be some deployment of .22 in big shops as far as I know.
>
> Who are these "big shops"?

EBay is a good example here I'm CCing Konstantin if you want to find
out more details.

> AFAIK, compared to 0.20.x or 0.23, 0.22 has a number of regressions.

I'm NOT sure I agree as far as 0.23 goes. The state of 0.23 is an
early alpha. There's
lots of work that still need to go into it before it graduates from an
alpha stage. As such
it is premature to talk about its quality. Now, the question of how
long it takes .23
to get to the same point of HDFS stability that .22 has -- is an open
one. And I'd
rather hear what Konstantin has to say about it.

> We need to assess how healthy 0.22 is.

It is pretty healthy.  If anybody is looking for a stable and up-to-date
HDFS feature set -- it is the one I'd recommend taking a look at. It is
assumed that MR is slower in .22 compared to 20.205, but frankly,
I haven't seen the numbers yet, so I can't speculate.

I've run a reasonable # of integration tests on that combo and I liked
the results.

> How much time/attention should the HBase community pay to what might be a DoA/ignored release?
> Or is that in fact the case (that it is DoA...)?

Personally, I think it is extremely unfair to refer to .22 as
DoA/ignored. Unless,
of course, such statement can be backed up with facts.

The facts that I have are such that there will be a reasonably large
deployment of
Hadoop 0.22 and HBase at EBay makes me believe that such a combination
should be of interest to HBase community.

Thanks,
Roman.

Roman,

> Personally, I think it is extremely unfair to refer to .22 as
> DoA/ignored. Unless, of course, such statement can be backed up with facts.
Yeah, DoA is harsh, when I meant more like "abandoned at release". Similar to 0.21.

Well that is my question, really. Is it?

We've heard that CDH4 is going to be start from something a lot closer to 0.23 than 0.22, that Hortonworks is committed to 0.23. It seems 0.23 is the future, and a RC may be happening as early as the end of this year, i.e. in the next month or so.

Given recent history and the above described commitments, I think there is confusion about where/if 0.22 fits in. People will work on what inspires them, but it seems the center of gravity has already moved beyond 0.22. Is that a fair statement?

> The facts that I have are such that there will be a reasonably large
> deployment of Hadoop 0.22 and HBase at EBay makes me believe that such
> a combination should be of interest to HBase community.
Then I'm sure the eBay guys will have that interest. :-)

Best regards,
  - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
----- Original Message -----
> From: Roman Shaposhnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Konstantin Shvachko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Konstantin Boudnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2011 2:16 PM
> Subject: Re: proper pace for JIRA integration
>
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>>  There will be some deployment of .22 in big shops as far as I know.
>>
>>  Who are these "big shops"?
>
> EBay is a good example here I'm CCing Konstantin if you want to find
> out more details.
>
>>  AFAIK, compared to 0.20.x or 0.23, 0.22 has a number of regressions.
>
> I'm NOT sure I agree as far as 0.23 goes. The state of 0.23 is an
> early alpha. There's
> lots of work that still need to go into it before it graduates from an
> alpha stage. As such
> it is premature to talk about its quality. Now, the question of how
> long it takes .23
> to get to the same point of HDFS stability that .22 has -- is an open
> one. And I'd
> rather hear what Konstantin has to say about it.
>
>>  We need to assess how healthy 0.22 is.
>
> It is pretty healthy.  If anybody is looking for a stable and up-to-date
> HDFS feature set -- it is the one I'd recommend taking a look at. It is
> assumed that MR is slower in .22 compared to 20.205, but frankly,
> I haven't seen the numbers yet, so I can't speculate.
>
> I've run a reasonable # of integration tests on that combo and I liked
> the results.
>
>>  How much time/attention should the HBase community pay to what might be a
> DoA/ignored release?
>>  Or is that in fact the case (that it is DoA...)?
>
> Personally, I think it is extremely unfair to refer to .22 as
> DoA/ignored. Unless,
> of course, such statement can be backed up with facts.
>
> The facts that I have are such that there will be a reasonably large
> deployment of
> Hadoop 0.22 and HBase at EBay makes me believe that such a combination
> should be of interest to HBase community.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We've heard that CDH4 is going to be start from something a lot closer to 0.23 than 0.22, that Hortonworks is committed to 0.23. It seems 0.23 is the future, and a RC may be happening as early as the end of this year, i.e. in the next month or so.

0.23.0rc0 was cut last night.

0.23.0 will be an alpha, but the HDFS side of it is actually looking
pretty good. I've been using it with various stress tests for quite a
while without turning up many new issues.

-Todd
--
Todd Lipcon
Software Engineer, Cloudera

Andrew,

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yeah, DoA is harsh, when I meant more like "abandoned at release". Similar to 0.21.
>
> Well that is my question, really. Is it?

Personally, I don't remember 0.21 being deployed anywhere in
production (I could be
wrong and would love to be corrected). With 0.22 there's at least EBay
and one other
reasonably big shop I know of that will be deploying it to production clusters.
Thus, IMHO, they are not similar in that regard.

> We've heard that CDH4 is going to be start from something a lot closer to 0.23 than 0.22,
> that Hortonworks is committed to 0.23. It seems 0.23 is the future, and a RC may be
> happening as early as the end of this year, i.e. in the next month or so.
>
> Given recent history and the above described commitments, I think there is confusion about where/if 0.22 fits in.
> People will work on what inspires them, but it seems the center of gravity has already moved beyond 0.22.
> Is that a fair statement?

>From my point of view, it will be fair to call 0.22 a *stable* stop
gap release before
0.23 matures. How long does the window of exposure for 0.22 last? Your guess is
as good as mine. At times I wish that HDFS and MR2 release work in .23
were done
as different projects. Take it with a grain of salt, but I believe
that MR2 will be holding
.23 back in terms of  deployment.

So here's the bottom line the way I see it: the worst that could
happen to an OS project
is to be a hostage of a NEXT great thing (KDE and other examples come to mind
readily). When Hadoop 0.23 will be stable enough -- it will surely
obsolete .22, in
the meantime we will have .22 to fill the gap.

> Then I'm sure the eBay guys will have that interest. :-)

That's the beauty of Open Source. On the other hand, since you asked a
"community"
question I was compelled to point out that there would be a reasonably
sizable community
running .22/HBase.

Thanks,
Roman.

P.S. Sorry for making this thread longer than it had to be. Lets take
it off-list from this reply on.

On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 02:57PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> Roman,
>
> > Personally, I think it is extremely unfair to refer to .22 as
> > DoA/ignored. Unless,═of course, such statement can be backed up with facts.
>
>
> Yeah, DoA is harsh, when I meant more like "abandoned at release". Similar to 0.21.
>
> Well that is my question, really. Is it?
>
> We've heard that CDH4 is going to be start from something a lot closer to
> 0.23 than 0.22, that Hortonworks is committed to 0.23. It seems 0.23 is the
> future, and a RC may be happening as early as the end of this year, i.e. in
> the next month or so.

Hadoop contributions are coming from many places, so I don't see why this is
so important to know how close a particular distro will be to this a that ASF
release. Just the other day we had this long thread about contributions on
Hadoop general@ - it might be interesting to re-read it.

> Given recent history and the above described═commitments, I think there is
> confusion about where/if 0.22 fits in. People will work on what inspires
> them, but it seems the center of gravity has already moved beyond 0.22. Is
> that a fair statement?

Perhaps I am missing the point of this discussion, but according to Hadoop
bylaws (available to anyone from https://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html):
<quote>
Product Release

When a release of one of the project's products is ready, a vote is required
to accept the release as an official release of the project.

Lazy Majority of active PMC members

</quote>

What anything in this thread has to do with the quote above? Hadoop is
released when it is ready and a release is official by the lazy majority.

If downstream projects decide not to participate in support a release - well,
this is sad, but this happens. And this means that a particular release will
have a somewhat smaller stack available to our users.

--
  Take care,
Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik
2CAC 8312 4870 D885 8616  6115 220F 6980 1F27 E622

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, and do
not necessarily represent the views of any company the author might be
affiliated with at the moment of writing.

> > The facts that I have are such that there will be a reasonably large
> > deployment of═Hadoop 0.22 and HBase at EBay makes me believe that such
> > a combination═should be of interest to HBase community.
>
>
> Then I'm sure the eBay guys will have that interest. :-)
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> ═ - Andy
>
> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Roman Shaposhnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Konstantin Shvachko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: Konstantin Boudnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2011 2:16 PM
> > Subject: Re: proper pace for JIRA integration
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >>> ═There will be some deployment of .22 in big shops as far as I know.
> >>
> >>  Who are these "big shops"?
> >
> > EBay is a good example here I'm CCing Konstantin if you want to find
> > out more details.
> >
> >>  AFAIK, compared to 0.20.x or 0.23, 0.22 has a number of regressions.
> >
> > I'm NOT sure I agree as far as 0.23 goes. The state of 0.23 is an
> > early alpha. There's
> > lots of work that still need to go into it before it graduates from an
> > alpha stage. As such
> > it is premature to talk about its quality. Now, the question of how
> > long it takes .23
> > to get to the same point of HDFS stability that .22 has -- is an open
> > one. And I'd
> > rather hear what Konstantin has to say about it.
> >
> >>  We need to assess how healthy 0.22 is.
> >
> > It is pretty healthy.═ If anybody is looking for a stable and up-to-date
> > HDFS feature set -- it is the one I'd recommend taking a look at. It is
> > assumed that MR is slower in .22 compared to 20.205, but frankly,
> > I haven't seen the numbers yet, so I can't speculate.

Roman, thanks for including me in this discussion.

Indeed we have been testing extensively Hadoop-0.22 branch for the
last two months and beyond. Latest tests on a relatively large dev
cluster were going well. I reported this recently on general@hadoop.

HBase is the main focus for us and was one of the primary motivations
for choosing the branch. We also run Hive and Pig. Oozie is in the
pipeline. And it all is coming together nicely on top of .22 so far.

0.22 branch has a pretty long history. And has been tested at
different times by different groups of contributors. Stack et.al. were
the first to test the new implementation of append, thanks for that.
Now I see .22 as (the only ?) alternative (to the 0.20-append branch
variations) for HBase community to move forward with your development.
You have been asking for it afair.

Not sure when 0.23 will be ready/stable. We have seen a push to 0.21
then to 0.22 only to return back to the 0.20 series afterwards. I am
very glad the .23 effort went all the way to alpha release. As I
previously said it takes time to stabilize a new file systems, which
essentially what you have in .23. HDFS .22 has been around for more
than a year.

Roman just created first hadoop 0.22 assemble build. Check the
artifact out, see for yourself if it's DoA or AaR, or may be WfM.
There isn't much buzz about .22 because nobody is commercializing it.
It's the community work. And it's up to us (you) to make it happen.

Thanks,
--Konstantin

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 02:57PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
>> Roman,
>>
>> > Personally, I think it is extremely unfair to refer to .22 as
>> > DoA/ignored. Unless,═of course, such statement can be backed up with facts.
>>
>>
>> Yeah, DoA is harsh, when I meant more like "abandoned at release". Similar to 0.21.
>>
>> Well that is my question, really. Is it?
>>
>> We've heard that CDH4 is going to be start from something a lot closer to
>> 0.23 than 0.22, that Hortonworks is committed to 0.23. It seems 0.23 is the
>> future, and a RC may be happening as early as the end of this year, i.e. in
>> the next month or so.
>
> Hadoop contributions are coming from many places, so I don't see why this is
> so important to know how close a particular distro will be to this a that ASF
> release. Just the other day we had this long thread about contributions on
> Hadoop general@ - it might be interesting to re-read it.
>
>> Given recent history and the above described═commitments, I think there is
>> confusion about where/if 0.22 fits in. People will work on what inspires
>> them, but it seems the center of gravity has already moved beyond 0.22. Is
>> that a fair statement?
>
> Perhaps I am missing the point of this discussion, but according to Hadoop
> bylaws (available to anyone from https://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html):
> <quote>
> Product Release
>
> When a release of one of the project's products is ready, a vote is required
> to accept the release as an official release of the project.
>
> Lazy Majority of active PMC members
>
> </quote>
>
> What anything in this thread has to do with the quote above? Hadoop is
> released when it is ready and a release is official by the lazy majority.
>
> If downstream projects decide not to participate in support a release - well,
> this is sad, but this happens. And this means that a particular release will
> have a somewhat smaller stack available to our users.
>
> --
>  Take care,
> Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik
> 2CAC 8312 4870 D885 8616  6115 220F 6980 1F27 E622
>
> Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, and do
> not necessarily represent the views of any company the author might be
> affiliated with at the moment of writing.
>
>> > The facts that I have are such that there will be a reasonably large
>> > deployment of═Hadoop 0.22 and HBase at EBay makes me believe that such
>> > a combination═should be of interest to HBase community.
>>

> From: Konstantin Shvachko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Indeed we have been testing extensively Hadoop-0.22 branch for the
> last two months and beyond. Latest tests on a relatively large dev
> cluster were going well. I reported this recently on general@hadoop.
> 
> HBase is the main focus for us and was one of the primary motivations
> for choosing the branch. We also run Hive and Pig. Oozie is in the
> pipeline. And it all is coming together nicely on top of .22 so far.
> 
> 0.22 branch has a pretty long history. And has been tested at
> different times by different groups of contributors. Stack et.al. were
> the first to test the new implementation of append, thanks for that.
> Now I see .22 as (the only ?) alternative (to the 0.20-append branch
> variations) for HBase community to move forward with your development.
> You have been asking for it afair.
Thank you very much. This is illuminating.
 
Best regards,
    - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
----- Original Message -----
> From: Konstantin Shvachko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Konstantin Boudnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Roman Shaposhnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc:
> Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 12:34 AM
> Subject: Re: proper pace for JIRA integration
>
> Roman, thanks for including me in this discussion.
>
> Indeed we have been testing extensively Hadoop-0.22 branch for the
> last two months and beyond. Latest tests on a relatively large dev
> cluster were going well. I reported this recently on general@hadoop.
>
> HBase is the main focus for us and was one of the primary motivations
> for choosing the branch. We also run Hive and Pig. Oozie is in the
> pipeline. And it all is coming together nicely on top of .22 so far.
>
> 0.22 branch has a pretty long history. And has been tested at
> different times by different groups of contributors. Stack et.al. were
> the first to test the new implementation of append, thanks for that.
> Now I see .22 as (the only ?) alternative (to the 0.20-append branch
> variations) for HBase community to move forward with your development.
> You have been asking for it afair.
>
> Not sure when 0.23 will be ready/stable. We have seen a push to 0.21
> then to 0.22 only to return back to the 0.20 series afterwards. I am
> very glad the .23 effort went all the way to alpha release. As I
> previously said it takes time to stabilize a new file systems, which
> essentially what you have in .23. HDFS .22 has been around for more
> than a year.
>
> Roman just created first hadoop 0.22 assemble build. Check the
> artifact out, see for yourself if it's DoA or AaR, or may be WfM.
> There isn't much buzz about .22 because nobody is commercializing it.
> It's the community work. And it's up to us (you) to make it happen.
>
> Thanks,
> --Konstantin
>
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>  On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 02:57PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
>>>  Roman,
>>>
>>>  > Personally, I think it is extremely unfair to refer to .22 as
>>>  > DoA/ignored. Unless,═of course, such statement can be backed up
> with facts.
>>>
>>>
>>>  Yeah, DoA is harsh, when I meant more like "abandoned at
> release". Similar to 0.21.
>>>
>>>  Well that is my question, really. Is it?
>>>
>>>  We've heard that CDH4 is going to be start from something a lot
> closer to
>>>  0.23 than 0.22, that Hortonworks is committed to 0.23. It seems 0.23 is
> the
>>>  future, and a RC may be happening as early as the end of this year,
> i.e. in
>>>  the next month or so.
>>
>>  Hadoop contributions are coming from many places, so I don't see why
> this is
>>  so important to know how close a particular distro will be to this a that
> ASF
>>  release. Just the other day we had this long thread about contributions on
>>  Hadoop general@ - it might be interesting to re-read it.
>>
>>>  Given recent history and the above described═commitments, I think there

Way to completely miss the point, Konstantin. This is not at all about HBase doing one thing or another. Points to you for twisting the argument. This was about me asking, essentially, if anything is different this time around with 0.22 versus what we all -- outside of core -- saw with 0.21.

It would be interesting to hear about plans for using 0.22 over at eBay.

A legalistic non-response is not particularly interesting nor relevant. This may be the manner of discussion over on general@ but I hope we can avoid this kind of stuff on the HBase lists.

Best regards,
  - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
----- Original Message -----
> From: Konstantin Boudnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Roman Shaposhnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Konstantin Shvachko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2011 4:49 PM
> Subject: Re: proper pace for JIRA integration
>
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 02:57PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
>>  Roman,
>>
>>  > Personally, I think it is extremely unfair to refer to .22 as
>>  > DoA/ignored. Unless,═of course, such statement can be backed up with
> facts.
>>
>>
>>  Yeah, DoA is harsh, when I meant more like "abandoned at
> release". Similar to 0.21.
>>
>>  Well that is my question, really. Is it?
>>
>>  We've heard that CDH4 is going to be start from something a lot closer
> to
>>  0.23 than 0.22, that Hortonworks is committed to 0.23. It seems 0.23 is the
>>  future, and a RC may be happening as early as the end of this year, i.e. in
>>  the next month or so.
>
> Hadoop contributions are coming from many places, so I don't see why this is
> so important to know how close a particular distro will be to this a that ASF
> release. Just the other day we had this long thread about contributions on
> Hadoop general@ - it might be interesting to re-read it.
>
>>  Given recent history and the above described═commitments, I think there is
>>  confusion about where/if 0.22 fits in. People will work on what inspires
>>  them, but it seems the center of gravity has already moved beyond 0.22. Is
>>  that a fair statement?
>
> Perhaps I am missing the point of this discussion, but according to Hadoop
> bylaws (available to anyone from https://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html):
> <quote>
> Product Release
>
> When a release of one of the project's products is ready, a vote is required
> to accept the release as an official release of the project.
>
> Lazy Majority of active PMC members
>
> </quote>
>
> What anything in this thread has to do with the quote above? Hadoop is
> released when it is ready and a release is official by the lazy majority.
>
> If downstream projects decide not to participate in support a release - well,
> this is sad, but this happens. And this means that a particular release will
> have a somewhat smaller stack available to our users.
>
> --
>   Take care,
> Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik
> 2CAC 8312 4870 D885 8616  6115 220F 6980 1F27 E622
>
> Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, and do
> not necessarily represent the views of any company the author might be
> affiliated with at the moment of writing.
>
>>  > The facts that I have are such that there will be a reasonably large
>>  > deployment of═Hadoop 0.22 and HBase at EBay makes me believe that such
>>  > a combination═should be of interest to HBase community.
>>
>>
>>  Then I'm sure the eBay guys will have that interest. :-)
>>
>>  Best regards,
>>
>>
>>  ═ - Andy
>>
>>  Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> (via Tom White)
>>
>>
>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>  > From: Roman Shaposhnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>  > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> Konstantin Shvachko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>  > Cc: Konstantin Boudnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>  > Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2011 2:16 PM