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

Switch to Threaded View
HBase >> mail # dev >> [DISCUSSION] Sorting out issues for 0.96 for (eventual) release


Copy link to this message
-
Re: [DISCUSSION] Sorting out issues for 0.96 for (eventual) release
Ted you seem to have picked some random part of this conversation and
misunderstood it?

On Tuesday, January 8, 2013, Ted Yu wrote:

> User has the flexibility of running 0.96 on jdk 1.6
>
> Cheers
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> > What do these two things have to do with each other?
> >
> > On Tuesday, January 8, 2013, Ted Yu wrote:
> >
> > > bq. depends on other communities because quite a bit seems broken on
> JDK
> > 7
> > > so I hear
> > >
> > > I have been running tests using 1.6.0_37 for trunk. Tests run smoothly
> so
> > > far.
> > >
> > > FYI
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<javascript:;>
> > <javascript:;>>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Stack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<javascript:;>
> <javascript:;>>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > That said, I think we should make up a list of what people want
> to
> > > see
> > > > > in,
> > > > > > and what could/should be excluded after we find that consensus.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > High-level, we have had this discussion IMO ([3]).  Would you like
> to
> > > do
> > > > it
> > > > > again Andrew?
> > > > >
> > > > > Otherwise, I think folks need to bubble up critical issues (or
> strike
> > > > them
> > > > > down) and if any controversial, lets discuss them?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Some time has elapsed since that discussion, I think we should do it
> > > again.
> > > >
> > > > For example, the notion of running on JDK 7 is new, and depends on
> > other
> > > > communities because quite a bit seems broken on JDK 7 so I hear. The
> > > creep
> > > > of "-Djava.net.preferIPv4=true" among Hadoop ecosystem projects is
> > also a
> > > > concern, and it bothers me that HDFS tests seem DOA without it on my
> > dev
> > > > box, so this also isn't something we are going to be able to solve
> > > entirely
> > > > on our own. So while I think these are serious concerns, I have mixed
> > > > feelings about them being prerequisites for a 0.96 release.
> > > >
> > > > A bunch of hard thoughtful intermingled work is underway in RPC and
> > HFile
> > > > and other places, so that we only need to do a "singularity" once. We
> > > > should do a feature based release for this, not a time based one, is
> my
> > > > opinion. As for everything else, setting a target and seeing what
> falls
> > > in
> > > > or out based on that is worth doing.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > >    - Andy
> > > >
> > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> > Hein
> > > > (via Tom White)
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> >    - Andy
> >
> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> > (via Tom White)
> >
>
--
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)