-Re: Community Process for 0.20.205 Sustaining Release
Konstantin Boudnik 2011-08-24, 16:47
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 09:32AM, Eric Baldeschwieler wrote:
> Hi Milind,
> I'm really happy to see 0.23 moving along. This seems like pretty clear
> evidence that 0.20.xxx is not going to be a new trunk. However, the time
> between cutting a new release and being able to run production applications
> on it can be very long. 0.23 and any alternative such as 0.22 will take a
> long time to get to the level of quality and stability that is in 0.20.xxx
> today. Trunk is looking very healthy to me. Having a good sustaining
I can bet money that someone will call it 'a very bad taste' joke in a next
20 minutes, but does it really look healthy with last successful MR trunk
build happened 2 mo 25 days ago?
Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik
2CAC 8312 4870 D885 8616 6115 220F 6980 1F27 E622
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, and do
not necessarily represent the views of any company the author might be
affiliated with at the moment of writing.
> program on 0.20.xxx is intended to compliment mainline dev, not replace it.
> Describing fixing flush/sync as innovation seems like a stretch. The patch
> sets we are considering merging have been in use for more than a year.
> There is a large constituency that would like to see HBASE work well now.
> I'm hoping to see that happen on 0.20.xxx. I think this is the best place
> to invest effort. You are welcome to work with the community members
> investing in 0.20.xxx or on an alternative. There is room in the community
> for both efforts IMO.
> On Aug 24, 2011, at 12:05 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> At the same time, we certainly do not wish 0.20-security to be viewed as a "trunk"; it is important
> > that all patches go in trunk first, and only patches of manageable risk and high value to production users, should go into
> > the sustaining releases.
> > Matt,
> > With all due respect, I have heard from "several of your associates", about features for making hbase work with the 0.20.2xx. That sounds to me that 0.20-security to be trunk.
> > Can you clarify how that is going to work ?
> > Basically, what are your criteria for "manageable risk and high value to production users" ?
> > In particular, I would like to know why the insistence on 0.20.2xx being the default branch to check-in these "innovations", instead of trunk.
> > * Milind
> > ---
> > Milind Bhandarkar
> > Greenplum Labs, EMC
> > (Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views of any organization, past or present, the author might be affiliated with.)