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

Switch to Plain View
HDFS >> mail # dev >> VOTE: HDFS-347 merge


+
Colin McCabe 2013-02-17, 21:48
+
Andrew Purtell 2013-02-18, 02:35
+
Stack 2013-02-18, 01:49
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-18, 22:03
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 00:11
+
Patrick Angeles 2013-02-20, 18:08
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-20, 19:56
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-20, 23:01
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 23:06
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 23:06
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-20, 23:08
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 23:13
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-20, 23:31
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 23:40
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-21, 00:04
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-21, 00:12
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-21, 00:28
+
Chris Douglas 2013-02-21, 00:29
+
Aaron T. Myers 2013-02-21, 01:12
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-21, 15:40
+
Andrew Purtell 2013-02-21, 01:32
+
Chris Douglas 2013-02-21, 21:24
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-21, 22:15
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-22, 21:55
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-23, 02:32
+
Aaron T. Myers 2013-02-23, 02:40
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-24, 00:23
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-25, 18:24
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-25, 20:50
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-25, 21:16
+
Chris Douglas 2013-02-25, 21:50
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-26, 00:09
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-26, 00:39
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-26, 17:33
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-26, 19:24
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-26, 19:35
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-26, 21:51
+
Chris Douglas 2013-02-27, 00:52
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-27, 01:09
+
Colin McCabe 2013-03-05, 20:24
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-03-05, 21:09
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-03-05, 23:08
+
sanjay Radia 2013-02-27, 19:45
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-27, 20:06
+
Colin McCabe 2013-02-27, 23:28
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-27, 23:42
Copy link to this message
-
Re: VOTE: HDFS-347 merge
Suresh offered to write a patch restoring HDFS-2246, so unless his
timeline is unacceptable, I think we're done.

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:45 AM, sanjay Radia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is not being held back of for the windows port. It is being held back because 2246 should not be removed as part of 347; a separate jira should had been filed to remove it.
> Chris argues well in an earlier email to remove 2246 on its own time and that there is precedent for doing so: Snippet of his email below:

I must have been unclear. HDFS-347 supports a subset of the current
users of HDFS-2246, so some devs have asked for time to accommodate
them. There's ample precedent for *that*, even when the implementation
of the obsolete feature is flawed. However, that accommodation was
rarely indefinite, and usually scoped to a release or two. As one of
the examples: combiners incompatible with Pig's use required a config
knob in a patch version; it was removed in the subsequent release.

The details matter, so no policy is possible, but parties may consider
the pressure applied by removing HDFS-2246 in trunk as sufficient and
appropriate, even if HDFS-2246 lives on in the 2.x branch. FWIW, I
think that's the compromise solution. -C

> On Feb 20, 2013, at 4:29 PM, Chris Douglas wrote:
>
>> There's
>> ample precedent for retaining obscure, clumsy features as a temporary
>> stop-gap (e.g., service plugins, opaque blobs of bytes in Tasks,
>> configurable combiner semantics). What's the virtue of insisting on
>> removing this?
>
>
> sanjay
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-25, 22:01
+
Colin McCabe 2013-02-25, 18:31
+
Colin McCabe 2013-02-22, 19:13
+
sanjay Radia 2013-02-27, 01:36
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-21, 00:47
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 20:16
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-20, 22:49
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 23:01
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-20, 23:19
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-20, 21:48
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 22:27
+
Bikas Saha 2013-02-26, 21:47
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-26, 22:07
+
Colin McCabe 2013-04-01, 23:32