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 Plain View
HBase >> mail # dev >> Marking fix version


+
Jonathan Hsieh 2013-04-04, 15:40
+
lars hofhansl 2013-04-04, 17:10
+
Jonathan Hsieh 2013-04-04, 17:15
Copy link to this message
-
Re: Marking fix version
Ok.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The argument for excluding the 0.96 tag makes sense.  Can we agree to do
> this:
>
> Commit only to trunk: Mark with 0.98
> Commit to 0.95 and trunk : Mark with 0.98, and 0.95.x
> Commit to 0.94.x and 0.95, and trunk: Mark with 0.98, 0.95.x, and 0.94.x
> Commit to 89-fb: Mark with 89-fb.
> Commit site fixes: no version
>
> Should we remove 0.96 tag for now until the branch appears again?
>
> Thanks,
> Jon.
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:10 AM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Thank Jon,
> >
> > I do not think we have to include anticipated future branches in the
> tags.
> > The release notes are not accumulative but list changes made for each
> > release.
> >
> > So if something is in 0.95.x a 0.96 tag neither needed nor wanted (IMHO)
> > until we actually have a *parallel* 0.96 branch.
> >
> > That is why all 0.95+trunk changes *have* to be tagged with 0.98 as well,
> > because at this point the two branches are in parallel. Actually we
> should
> > go through and make that so in jira.
> >
> > That means the 0.96 tag is not needed right now (and in fact will make
> > just confusing, because at the time we do release 0.96 we'll see the same
> > issue in the release notes twice)
> >
> > -- Lars
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >  From: Jonathan Hsieh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 8:40 AM
> > Subject: Marking fix version
> >
> > Hey all,
> >
> > I just wanted to make sure we are on the same page here when we
> committing
> > code and that we are consistent when marking fix version in the jira.
>  Its
> > pretty important that we get this right because our release notes are
> > generated from these as of 0.94.
> >
> > Here's what I'm doing and suggesting
> >
> > Commit only to trunk: Mark with 0.98
> > Commit to 0.95 and trunk : Mark with 0.98, 0.96, and 0.95.x
> > Commit to 0.94.x and 0.95, and trunk: Mark with 0.98, 0.96, 0.95.x, and
> > 0.94.x
> > Commit to 89-fb: Mark with 89-fb.
> > Commit site fixes: no version
> >
> > My understanding is that 0.96 will be a branch off of 0.95 -- so any fix
> to
> > 0.95 is a fix to 0.96 until 0.96 branches.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jon.
> >
> > --
> > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > // [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
>
>
> --
> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> // [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

--
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)
+
lars hofhansl 2013-04-04, 17:33
+
Nick Dimiduk 2013-04-04, 18:55
+
lars hofhansl 2013-04-04, 19:04
+
Stack 2013-04-04, 18:43
+
Stack 2013-04-06, 06:18
+
Jonathan Hsieh 2013-04-06, 20:05
+
Stack 2013-09-18, 22:00
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