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

Switch to Threaded View
Accumulo >> mail # dev >> Schedule for 1.6.0 release?


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Schedule for 1.6.0 release?
+1 by the end of the year with adequate time for testing.

Just so we're all clear (because I don't remember where we ended up
either), feature freeze means "all features tagged for 1.6.0 must be
finished", right? In other words, if I had something planned for 1.6.0 that
I haven't started, I need to finish it before the feature freeze date
regardless of whether or not it's a new feature or not? In other words, by
"feature freeze" we really mean "only bug-fixes"?
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Eric Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> +1
>
> I absolutely need to have multiple volume support in a release by the
> end-of-year.
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Keith Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > We do need to get this settled.  What about end of year target for
> release
> > date and feature freeze date at end of Oct?
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Mike Drob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I wanted to revive this conversation, since fall is fast approaching.
> One
> > > reasonable target for a release date might be to try and get something
> > done
> > > before Hadoop World/Strata NY, which is the last week of October. That
> > is a
> > > bit sooner than initially planned, but would be a great bit of PR if it
> > > were possible. Regardless, we need to seriously think about a feature
> > > freeze date and get that agreed upon.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Eric Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Absolutely this would be helpful!
> > > >
> > > > I have access to a 10-node cluster, and regularly run the continuous
> > > ingest
> > > > test, and the random walk tests for long periods (24-48 hours) prior
> to
> > > > release.  Running these sooner can shorten the release cycle quite a
> > bit.
> > > >
> > > > If anyone has access to a medium-sized cluster (say, 100-500 nodes)
> > that
> > > > can be used for scale testing, even if only for a short period, or
> > shared
> > > > with other users, that would be helpful, too.
> > > >
> > > > -Eric
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Donald Miner <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I've talked to a couple of people about this in person, but figured
> > I'd
> > > > put
> > > > > it out here.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have access to a 16 node cluster in my lab that we typically use
> > for
> > > > R&D
> > > > > type projects. We have accumulo on it right now and is typically
> > doing
> > > > > something hadoop related. If there is a need to do testing of
> > accumulo
> > > > > release on bare metal with respectable equipment, let me know how
> we
> > > > might
> > > > > be able to contribute.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Don
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Dave Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Historically, how long has it taken to complete testing of
> release
> > > > > > candidates? Subtract that from 1 November and that should be the
> > > target
> > > > > > date. Based on 1.5.0, that means feature complete is tomorrow,
> > right?
> > > > :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Sean Busbey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 5:17 PM
> > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > Subject: Schedule for 1.6.0 release?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One of the action items out of the 1.6.0 discussion[1] was that
> > we'd
> > > > use
> > > > > > the list to decide on a target release date, feature set, and
> > > > incremental
> > > > > > milestones for Accumulo 1.6.0.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I know the initial plan was to aim for November, and right now
> Jira
> > > > says
> > > > > > as much[2].
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's only ~4 months away, so we should lay out some plans. When
> > do
> > > we
> > > > > > need to target feature complete to meet that goal? When does code
> > > > freeze
> > > > > > need to happen?