Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli 2012-08-28, 01:55
Robert Evans 2012-08-28, 13:47
Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli 2012-08-28, 18:36
I am fine with 23.1 and 23.2 going away, so long as 23.1 has a tag.
On 8/28/12 1:36 PM, "Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Thanks Bobby, makes sense to keep 0.23.3 as is for now.
>What about my comments about 23.1 and 23.2?
>On Aug 28, 2012, at 6:47 AM, Robert Evans wrote:
>> I plan to do a RC of 0.23.3 in the next few days. I am waiting for some
>> tests of what is on branch-0.23 right now to pass before I create the
>> branch. MAPREDUCE-3943 went in recently and it is big enough I want
>> more tests before I feel comfortable with it. The tests for it so far
>> look good so I expect to get started on it today or tomorrow, but I have
>> never done a release before so I am sure it will take me a few days to
>> everything right. Also I don't see any reason to branch early when all
>> that is going in is bug fixes.
>> --Bobby Evans
>> On 8/27/12 8:55 PM, "Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Seems to me that stale branches have started accumulating. Here's what
>>> am thinking.
>>> 2.* line
>>> - 2.0.1-alpha is released, so branch-2.0.1-alpha should instead be
>>> called branch-2.0.2-alpha?
>>> 0.23.* line
>>> - 0.23.1 was released long time back, so knock off branch-0.23.1
>>> - 0.23.2 seems to be dead, so knock off branch-0.23.2 too?
>>> - 0.23.3 is the next expected release, so I suppose all the commits are
>>> going into branch-0.23. Either we can
>>> -- create branch-0.23.3 out of branch-0.23 now itself or
>>> -- commit as is to branch-0.23 and create RC out of the same whenever
>>> that happens.
>>> PS: I missed action for ~1 month, please correct me if I am wrong.
Owen OMalley 2012-08-31, 21:26
Arun C Murthy 2012-08-31, 21:28
Owen OMalley 2012-08-31, 22:04
Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli 2012-09-04, 19:35
Eli Collins 2012-08-31, 21:54