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

Switch to Threaded View
Hadoop, mail # general - Heads Up - hadoop-2.0.3 release


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Heads Up - hadoop-2.0.3 release
lohit 2012-12-03, 18:02
Hello Hadoop Release managers,
Any update on this?

Thanks,
Lohit

2012/11/20 Tom White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Siddharth Seth
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > YARN-142/MAPREDUCE-4067 should ideally be fixed before we commit to API
> > backward compatibility. Also, from the recent YARN meetup - there seemed
> to
> > be a requirement to change the AM-RM protocol for container requests. In
> > this case, I believe it's OK to not have all functionality implemented,
> as
> > long as the protocol itself can represent the requirements.
>
> I agree. Do you think we can make these changes before removing the
> 'alpha' label, i.e. in 2.0.3? If that's not possible for the container
> requests change, then we could mark AMRMProtocol (or related classes)
> as @Evolving. Another alternative would be to introduce a new
> interface.
>
> > However, as
> > Bobby pointed out, given the current adoption by other projects -
> > incompatible changes at this point can be problematic and needs to be
> > figured out.
>
> We have a mechanism for this already. If something is marked as
> @Evolving it can change incompatibly between minor versions - e.g.
> 2.0.x to 2.1.0. If it is @Stable then it can only change on major
> versions, e.g. 2.x.y to 3.0.0. Let's make sure we are happy with the
> annotations - and willing to support them at the indicated level -
> before we remove the 'alpha' label. Of course, we strive not to change
> APIs without a very good reason, but if we do we should do so within
> the guidelines so that users know what to expect.
>
> Cheers,
> Tom
>
> >
> > Thanks
> > - Sid
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Robert Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I am OK with removing the alpha assuming that we think that the APIs are
> >> stable enough that we are willing to truly start maintaining backwards
> >> compatibility on them within 2.X. From what I have seen I think that
> they
> >> are fairly stable and I think there is enough adoption by other projects
> >> right now that breaking backwards compatibility would be problematic.
> >>
> >> --Bobby Evans
> >>
> >> On 11/16/12 11:34 PM, "Stack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Aaron T. Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >> >> Hi Arun,
> >> >>
> >> >> Given that the 2.0.3 release is intended to reflect the growing
> >> >>stability
> >> >> of YARN, and the QJM work will be included in 2.0.3 which provides a
> >> >> complete HDFS HA solution, I think it's time we consider removing the
> >> >> "-alpha" label from the release version. My preference would be to
> >> >>remove
> >> >> the label entirely, but we could also perhaps call it "-beta" or
> >> >>something.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thoughts?
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >I think it fine after two minor releases undoing the '-alpha' suffix.
> >> >
> >> >If folks insist we next go to '-beta', I'd hope we'd travel all
> >> >remaining 22 letters of the greek alphabet before we 2.0.x.
> >> >
> >> >St.Ack
> >>
> >>
>

--
Have a Nice Day!
Lohit