-Re: [DISCUSSION] Sorting out issues for 0.96 for (eventual) release
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
> > > > That said, I think we should make up a list of what people want to
> > > in,
> > > > and what could/should be excluded after we find that consensus.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > High-level, we have had this discussion IMO (). Would you like to
> > 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
> > 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
> > 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
> > 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
> > 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)
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)