Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Plain View
Hadoop, mail # dev - Re: [VOTE] - Release 2.0.5-beta


+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-05-15, 18:02
+
Arpit Gupta 2013-05-15, 19:54
+
Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli 2013-05-15, 18:59
+
Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli 2013-05-15, 19:11
+
Arun C Murthy 2013-05-15, 19:19
+
Karthik Kambatla 2013-05-15, 18:23
+
Alejandro Abdelnur 2013-05-15, 18:32
+
Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli 2013-05-15, 19:19
+
Bikas Saha 2013-05-15, 20:16
+
Matt Foley 2013-05-15, 20:23
+
Amir Sanjar 2013-05-15, 18:14
+
Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli 2013-05-15, 18:06
+
Nathan Roberts 2013-05-16, 18:28
+
Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli 2013-05-17, 07:06
+
eric baldeschwieler 2013-05-15, 20:20
+
Sandy Ryza 2013-05-15, 20:25
Copy link to this message
-
Re: [VOTE] - Release 2.0.5-beta
Matt Foley 2013-05-15, 20:29
>> Arun, not sure whether your "Yes to all" already covered this, but I'd
like
>> to throw in support for the compatibility guidelines being a blocker.

+1 to that.  Definitely an overriding concern for me.
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Sandy Ryza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Agreed with Bikas that we should get the scheduler API enhancements
> (YARN-397) in we are able, but they don't need to be blockers because they
> will be backwards compatible.
>
> Arun, not sure whether your "Yes to all" already covered this, but I'd like
> to throw in support for the compatibility guidelines being a blocker.
>
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 1:20 PM, eric baldeschwieler <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > On May 15, 2013, at 10:57 AM, Arun C Murthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Folks,
> > >
> > > A considerable number of people have expressed confusion regarding the
> > recent vote on 2.0.5, beta status etc. given lack of specifics, the
> voting
> > itself (validity of the vote itself, whose votes are binding) etc.
> > >
> > > IMHO technical arguments (incompatibility b/w 2.0 & 2.1, current
> > stability of 3 features under debate etc.) have been lost in the
> discussion
> > in favor of non-technical (almost dramatic) nuances such as "seizing the
> > moment". There is now dangerous talk of tolerating incompatibility b/w
> 2.0
> > and 2.1) - this is a red flag for me; particularly when there are just 3
> > features being debated and active committers and contributors are
> confident
> > of and ready to stand by their work. All patches, I believe, are ready to
> > be merged in the the next few days per discussions on jira. This will,
> > clearly, not delay the other API work which everyone agrees is crucial.
> As
> > a result, I feel no recourse but to restart a new vote - all attempts at
> > calm, reasoned, civil discussion based on technical arguments have come
> to
> > naught - I apologize for the thrash caused to everyone's attention.
> > >
> > > To get past all of this confusion, I'd like to present an alternate,
> > specific proposal for consideration.
> > >
> > > I propose we continue the original plan and make a 2.0.5-beta release
> by
> > May end with the following content:
> > > # HDFS-347
> > > # HDFS Snapshots
> > > # Windows support
> > > # Necessary & final API/protocol changes such as:
> > > * Final YARN API changes: YARN-386
> > > * MR Binary Compatibility: MAPREDUCE-5108
> > > * Final RPC cleanup: HADOOP-8990
> > >
> > > People working on the above features have all expressed considerable
> > comfort with them and are ready to stand-by to help expedite any
> necessary
> > bug-fixes etc. to get to stabilization quickly. I'm confident we can get
> > this release out by end of May. This sets stage for a hadoop-2.x GA
> release
> > right after with some more testing - this means I think I can quickly
> turn
> > around and make bug-fix releases as necessary right after 2.0.5-beta.
> > >
> > > I request that people consider helping out with this plan and sign up
> to
> > help push hadoop-2.x to stability as outlined above. I believe this will
> > help achieve our shared goals of quickly stabilizing hadoop-2 and help
> > ensure we can support it for forseeable future in a compatible manner for
> > the benefit of our users and downstream projects.
> > >
> > > Please vote, the vote will run the normal 7 days. Obviously, I'm +1.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > > Arun
> > >
> > > PS: To keep this discussion grounded in technical details I've moved
> > this to dev@ (bcc general@).
> > >
> >
> >
>
+
Eli Collins 2013-05-15, 20:43
+
Zhijie Shen 2013-05-15, 20:47
+
Steve Loughran 2013-05-15, 21:21
+
Chris Douglas 2013-05-15, 22:27
+
Arun C Murthy 2013-05-15, 23:44
+
Matt Foley 2013-05-15, 23:56
+
Konstantin Shvachko 2013-05-15, 22:36
+
Roman Shaposhnik 2013-05-15, 20:29
+
Matt Foley 2013-05-15, 20:36
+
Roman Shaposhnik 2013-05-15, 20:56
+
Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli 2013-05-15, 21:14
+
Roman Shaposhnik 2013-05-15, 21:54
+
Konstantin Boudnik 2013-05-15, 23:17
+
Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli 2013-05-16, 06:34
+
Arun C Murthy 2013-05-15, 21:20
+
Arun C Murthy 2013-05-15, 22:02
+
Steve Loughran 2013-05-15, 22:31
+
Roman Shaposhnik 2013-05-15, 22:50
+
Arun C Murthy 2013-05-15, 23:47
+
Matt Foley 2013-05-15, 23:54
+
Konstantin Boudnik 2013-05-16, 06:19
+
Steve Loughran 2013-05-16, 17:22
+
Roman Shaposhnik 2013-05-17, 19:52
+
Andrew Purtell 2013-05-16, 04:25
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-05-16, 05:05
+
Andrew Purtell 2013-05-16, 05:41
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-05-16, 05:52
+
Konstantin Boudnik 2013-05-16, 06:38
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-05-16, 07:20
+
Arun C Murthy 2013-05-16, 18:18
+
Andrew Purtell 2013-05-16, 05:29
+
Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli 2013-05-15, 21:15
+
Devaraj Das 2013-05-15, 20:39
+
Robert Evans 2013-05-16, 15:19
+
lohit 2013-05-16, 05:29
+
Doug Cutting 2013-05-17, 22:48
+
Konstantin Shvachko 2013-05-21, 08:33
+
sanjay Radia 2013-05-21, 06:27
+
Mayank Bansal 2013-05-22, 20:17