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
HBase >> mail # dev >> Porting policy from 0.94 to 0.92


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Porting policy from 0.94 to 0.92
Hi Ted,

With my Apache hat on: the policies used by distribution vendors may
differ from the policies in the project itself. I think the Apache
project should be concerned with pushing the ball forward on new
releases and not on backporting features to older branches. Vendors
have internal QA teams and may have pressure from customers to
backport things that don't necessarily make sense to spend effort on
in upstream stable releases.

The fact that a Cloudera build for a specific customer has a certain
patch doesn't necessarily have bearing on whether the community at
large feels it is appropriate for that branch.

-Todd

On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Ted Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for your comment, Todd.
>
> I have observed some flexibility in this regard from, say cdh3u4a:
>
> http://archive.cloudera.com/ebay/cdh3u4a-rc1/cdh/3/hbase-0.92.1+82.releasenotes.html
>
> Cheers
>
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Todd Lipcon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I think there's a distinction from porting to the newest release
>> (0.94.x, which is not yet really widely deployed, though starting to
>> get there) compared to porting to a one-old release (0.92.x). I think
>> we should be especially conservative about adding even non-invasive
>> features to "stable" branches. The higher the "y" in 0.x.y, the more
>> conservative we should be, since it implies that branch has gone
>> through quite a bit of stabilization and we should avoid risk.
>>
>> -Todd
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Ted Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > As release manager of 0.92.x, I want to poll your opinion on porting
>> policy
>> > from 0.94 to 0.92
>> >
>> > Earlier there was email thread 'Porting policy from 0.96+ to 0.94'.
>> > From that thread, I think there was green light for porting non invasive,
>> > small new features if some committer/party shows interest.
>> > My interpretation of 'non invasive' is that the feature doesn't change
>> > HFile format or IPC protocol. We would always guarantee rolling upgrade
>> > from earlier 0.92 release to newer release.
>> >
>> > Particular JIRA leading to this poll:
>> > HBASE-6726 Port HBASE-4465 'Lazy-seek optimization for StoreFile
>> scanners'
>> > to 0.92
>> >
>> > Your comment is welcome.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Todd Lipcon
>> Software Engineer, Cloudera
>>

--
Todd Lipcon
Software Engineer, Cloudera
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