Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
MapReduce >> mail # dev >> [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.1.0-beta


Copy link to this message
-
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.1.0-beta
Vinod, your thinking makes sense to me. My two cents are that we should
hold off on fixes until 2.1.1-beta.  Unless there are downstream projects
that need it to work for integration testing.

-Sandy
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>
> Thanks for the clarification Daryn. That is what I was asking before when
> I said "From my limited understanding, this doesn't seem like a API or a
> compatibility issue. Can we not fix it in subsequent bug-fix releases? "
>
> Now, I was wavering as to whether we can omit this or not. There are other
> such things like YARN-1082 (RM restart doesn't work in security), YARN-49
> (dist-shell in secure mode) etc. that is essentially a loss of some
> functionality in some cases (secure mode).
>
> Flipping back the question, aren't we okay release now with all the API
> changes that are already in and then immediately follow up with a bunch of
> bug-fix releases or wait till 'everything' gets fixed.
>
> Posing the question like that, I am willing to move ahead without waiting
> for these fixes, but that's just me.
>
> What do others think?
>
> Thanks,
> +Vinod
>
> On Aug 19, 2013, at 8:25 AM, Daryn Sharp wrote:
>
> I've been OOO (got a call to fix this bug), but just to clarify:
>
> We're ok with HA _not working at all_ with security enabled in 2.1.0-beta?
>  That's the ramification of omitting HADOOP-9880.
>
> Daryn
>
> On Aug 16, 2013, at 9:20 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
>
> Yep, there are quite a number of such fixes in 2.1.1 ATM, I think it will
> serve us better to get 2.1.0 out and then quickly turn around to make 2.1.1.
>
>
> My current plan is to start work on 2.1.1 right after this release gets
> complete… hopefully next week.
>
>
> thanks,
>
> Arun
>
>
> On Aug 16, 2013, at 4:36 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> There are other such isolated and well understood bug-fixes that we pushed
> to 2.1.1 in the interesting of making progress with 2.1.0 and the
> corresponding API changes.
>
>
> 2.1.1 should happen soon enough after this.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> +Vinod
>
>
> On Aug 16, 2013, at 4:22 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>
>
> What are the downsides of getting this fix into the 2.1? It appears
>
> that the fix is pretty isolated and well understood.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Roman.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Kihwal Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've changed the target version of HADOOP-9880 to 2.1.1.  Please change it
> back, if you feel that it needs to be in 2.1.0-beta.
>
>
>
> Kihwal
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Kihwal Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> To: Arun Murthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Cc: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 4:55 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.1.0-beta
>
>
>
> It's your call, Arun.  I.e. as long you believe rc2 meets the expectations
> and objectives of 2.1.0-beta.
>
>
> Kihwal
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Arun Murthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Cc: Kihwal Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 3:44 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.1.0-beta
>
>
>
> That makes sense too.
>
>
>
> On Aug 16, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> We need to make a call on what blockers will be. From my limited
> understanding, this doesn't seem like a API or a compatibility issue. Can
> we not fix it in subsequent bug-fix releases?
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB