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

Switch to Threaded View
HDFS, mail # dev - Re: Release numbering for branch-2 releases


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Release numbering for branch-2 releases
Stack 2013-02-05, 18:42
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Suresh Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Owen O'Malley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I think that using "-(alpha,beta)" tags on the release versions is a
> really
> > bad idea.
>
>
> Why? Can you please share some reasons?
>
>
We already had a means for denoting 'alpha' software -- release candidates
-- and 'beta'; early versions of a major release were installed with
trepidation by all but the clueless.

We also had a place for API changes and wire format revamps; they were done
in the next major version, not between point releases (caveat unintended
mess-ups).

The -alpha and -beta designations muddy hard-won understanding of what the
numbers mean.

> I actually think alpha and beta and stable/GA are much better way to set
> the expectation
> of the quality of a release. This has been practiced in software release
> cycle for a long time.
>

Not in hadoop though, not until these 2.0ings.

> Having an option to release alpha is good for releasing early and getting
> feedback from
> people who can try it out and at the same time warning other not so
> adventurous users on
> quality expectation.
>
>
Lets call it a snapshot instead because alpha is damaged (IMO).

Thanks Suresh,
St.Ack