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

Switch to Plain View
Hadoop >> mail # general >> [VOTE] Release plan for Hadoop 2.0.5


+
Konstantin Shvachko 2013-05-01, 19:53
+
Jagane Sundar 2013-05-03, 06:25
+
Arun C Murthy 2013-05-01, 20:16
+
Konstantin Boudnik 2013-05-03, 03:40
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-05-04, 22:21
+
Konstantin Boudnik 2013-05-07, 03:28
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-05-04, 22:34
+
Roman Shaposhnik 2013-05-01, 21:36
+
Chris Douglas 2013-05-04, 06:40
+
Konstantin Shvachko 2013-05-09, 05:40
+
Arun C Murthy 2013-05-09, 13:12
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-05-09, 14:58
+
Konstantin Shvachko 2013-05-09, 21:31
+
Arun C Murthy 2013-05-09, 21:41
+
Milind Bhandarkar 2013-05-09, 21:59
+
Chris Douglas 2013-05-09, 22:08
+
Konstantin Shvachko 2013-05-10, 06:14
+
Chris Douglas 2013-05-10, 20:34
+
Arun C Murthy 2013-05-11, 14:03
+
Konstantin Shvachko 2013-05-13, 04:26
+
Chris Douglas 2013-05-13, 15:33
+
Arun C Murthy 2013-05-13, 20:41
+
Andrew Purtell 2013-05-14, 05:35
+
Andrew Purtell 2013-05-11, 00:48
+
Konstantin Shvachko 2013-05-09, 21:41
+
Steve Loughran 2013-05-09, 23:38
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-05-04, 22:33
+
Roman Shaposhnik 2013-05-05, 01:38
+
Steve Loughran 2013-05-06, 17:43
+
Robert Evans 2013-05-03, 15:23
Copy link to this message
-
Re: [VOTE] Release plan for Hadoop 2.0.5
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please vote on the following plan for Hadoop release 2.0.5
> - bug fixes encountered in current release 2.0.4-alpha
> - make all API changes to allow freezing them post 2.0.5
> - no new features

Hey Konstantin,

It might make sense to have a separate discussion thread on this point
where you outline how you propose to make all API changes in 2.0.x
ahead of 2.1.0.  It seems like the only way you could do this w/o
having 2.0 and 2.1 diverge is to merge the relevant API changes from
branch-2 (ie that will be in 2.1) to the branch you create. However,
that means the API stabilization in your branch is gated by the 2.1.0
release anyway, and it's often hard to merge API changes w/o also
taking the feature they were introduced in.

It sounds like Yahoo! and others would benefit from a 2.0.x release
series where the existing 2.0.4 scope is stabilized, ie your 1st and
3rd bullets above, but I don't think the 2nd bullet makes sense
because the RM for the 2.0.x series doesn't get to make the call that
the 2.1.x APIs are frozen.  Also, as a community we're going to have
to make sure there's a good upgrade story around APIs from 0.23.x and
2.0.x to 2.1.x anyway.

Thanks,
Eli
+
Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli 2013-05-10, 00:25
+
J. Rottinghuis 2013-05-10, 02:40
+
lohit 2013-05-10, 02:58
+
Andrew Purtell 2013-05-10, 04:13
+
Konstantin Shvachko 2013-05-10, 06:39
+
Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli 2013-05-11, 01:05
+
Uma Maheswara Rao G 2013-05-10, 05:03
+
Arun C Murthy 2013-05-10, 18:55
+
Stack 2013-05-10, 20:33
+
Robert Evans 2013-05-13, 16:36
+
Chris Nauroth 2013-05-13, 17:37
+
Chris Douglas 2013-05-13, 21:46
+
Konstantin Shvachko 2013-05-14, 06:39
+
Robert Evans 2013-05-14, 18:32
+
Stack 2013-05-10, 20:23