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

Switch to Threaded View
Hadoop, mail # dev - Re: [VOTE] - Release 2.0.5-beta


Copy link to this message
-
RE: [VOTE] - Release 2.0.5-beta
Bikas Saha 2013-05-15, 20:16
I am +1 to the proposal because it maintains the original cadence a bunch
of us committers/contributors have been working with.

Windows related changes have been made in a conservative manner so as not
to destabilize the code base. The changes are being extensively tested and
validated by community members, especially those from Microsoft.

YARN-397 jiras are mainly enhancements that can be added in a backwards
compatible manner. Would be great if some of them make it but I would not
hold the release for them.

Let us all make the effort to get the release out with all the long
awaited and useful features as planned.
Bikas

-----Original Message-----
From: Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 12:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [VOTE] - Release 2.0.5-beta
I also feel that some of YARN-397 should go in. If you also feel so,
please put in a +1 to state your intention.

Thanks,
+Vinod

On May 15, 2013, at 11:32 AM, Alejandro Abdelnur wrote:

> Do we need to add YARN-397?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Karthik Kambatla
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>> Hi Arun,
>>
>> Can we add HADOOP-9517 to the list - having compatibility guidelines
>> should help us support users and downstream projects better?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Karthik
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Arun C Murthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>> A considerable number of people have expressed confusion regarding
>>> the recent vote on 2.0.5, beta status etc. given lack of specifics,
>>> the
>> voting
>>> itself (validity of the vote itself, whose votes are binding) etc.
>>>
>>> IMHO technical arguments (incompatibility b/w 2.0 & 2.1, current
>> stability
>>> of 3 features under debate etc.) have been lost in the discussion in
>> favor
>>> of non-technical (almost dramatic) nuances such as "seizing the
moment".
>>> There is now dangerous talk of tolerating incompatibility b/w 2.0
>>> and
>> 2.1)
>>> - this is a red flag for me; particularly when there are just 3
>>> features being debated and active committers and contributors are
>>> confident of and ready to stand by their work. All patches, I
>>> believe, are ready to be merged in the the next few days per
>>> discussions on jira. This will, clearly, not delay the other API work
which everyone agrees is crucial.
>> As
>>> a result, I feel no recourse but to restart a new vote - all
>>> attempts at calm, reasoned, civil discussion based on technical
>>> arguments have come
>> to
>>> naught - I apologize for the thrash caused to everyone's attention.
>>>
>>> To get past all of this confusion, I'd like to present an alternate,
>>> specific proposal for consideration.
>>>
>>> I propose we continue the original plan and make a 2.0.5-beta
>>> release by May end with the following content:
>>> # HDFS-347
>>> # HDFS Snapshots
>>> # Windows support
>>> # Necessary & final API/protocol changes such as:
>>> * Final YARN API changes: YARN-386
>>> * MR Binary Compatibility: MAPREDUCE-5108
>>> * Final RPC cleanup: HADOOP-8990
>>>
>>> People working on the above features have all expressed considerable
>>> comfort with them and are ready to stand-by to help expedite any
>> necessary
>>> bug-fixes etc. to get to stabilization quickly. I'm confident we can
>>> get this release out by end of May. This sets stage for a hadoop-2.x
>>> GA
>> release
>>> right after with some more testing - this means I think I can
>>> quickly
>> turn
>>> around and make bug-fix releases as necessary right after 2.0.5-beta.
>>>
>>> I request that people consider helping out with this plan and sign
>>> up to help push hadoop-2.x to stability as outlined above. I believe
>>> this will help achieve our shared goals of quickly stabilizing
>>> hadoop-2 and help ensure we can support it for forseeable future in
>>> a compatible manner for the benefit of our users and downstream
projects.
>>>
>>> Please vote, the vote will run the normal 7 days. Obviously, I'm +1.