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

Switch to Threaded View
Hadoop, mail # general - Re: [VOTE] Release candidate 0.20.203.0-rc0


Copy link to this message
-
Re: [VOTE] Release candidate 0.20.203.0-rc1
Konstantin Boudnik 2011-05-04, 23:32
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 15:06, Suresh Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Eli,
>
> How many of these patches that you find troublesome are in CDH already?

How is that relevant to the release vote and discrepancies listed in
Eli's email?

> Regards,
> Suresh
>
>
> On 5/4/11 3:03 PM, "Eli Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Owen O'Malley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Here's an updated release candidate for 0.20.203.0. I've incorporated the
>>> feedback and included all of the patches from 0.20.2, which is the last
>>> stable release. I also fixed the eclipse-plugin problem.
>>>
>>> The candidate is at: http://people.apache.org/~omalley/hadoop-0.20.203.0-rc1/
>>>
>>> Please download it, inspect it, compile it, and test it. Clearly, I'm +1.
>>>
>>> -- Owen
>>
>> While rc2 is an improvement on rc1, I am -1 on this particular rc.  Rationale:
>>
>> This rc contains many patches not yet committed to trunk. This would
>> cause the next major release (0.22) to be a feature regression against
>> our latest stable release (203), were 0.22 released soon.
>>
>> This rc contains many patches not yet reviewed by the community via
>> the normal process (jira, patch against trunk, merge to a release
>> branch). I think we should respect the existing community process that
>> has been used for all previous releases.
>>
>> This rc introduces a new development and braching model (new feature
>> development outside trunk) and Hadoop versioning scheme without
>> sufficient discussion or proposal of these changes with the community.
>>
>> We should establish new process before the release, a release is not
>> the appropriate mechanism for changing our review and development
>> process or versioning .
>>
>> I do support a release from branch-0.20-security that follows the
>> existing, established community process.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Eli
>
>