Mailing-List: contact dev-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of busbey@cloudera.com
 designates 209.85.192.182 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAL5zq9YBVgOhk7vxYJXatSW60qQeTNr0=1=GHWYRTR1C_=0+eQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CADczPYScid=9K6uABF1O+O8XX21kFYGJQcAbx666ma3k2H0u3Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL5zq9aRfbKxCBYiqjDiUw1my9-BDMvXBty=UiUZe2nf7h-wHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADczPYSuVpwNkjXuFsQZegLy4oAs209h0akvXkkejd8Ys+cZ0Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <526AC343.2020801@gmail.com>
 <CAL5zq9YBVgOhk7vxYJXatSW60qQeTNr0=1=GHWYRTR1C_=0+eQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 14:49:15 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CAGHyZ6LD+aXjmOy0ULgO1fWXVVSNVkG7k9e8LtfCJ7cXf+=U1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
To: "dev@accumulo apache. org" <dev@accumulo.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b6d95d0ce4f7704e9960ccb

--047d7b6d95d0ce4f7704e9960ccb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Does anyone know off the top of their head the feature(s) that caused 1.6
to be planned as a major release in the first place?

I see ~180 resolved issues in jira, but we don't appear to have a shortcut
for flagging things as breaking.


On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:

> I don't mind putting things off to 1.7 (if necessary). But... if 1.6.0
> isn't sufficiently feature rich, there's not really a reason to
> release it just yet... until those features are ready. That said, I do
> think there'll be enough features in 1.6.0 to release it as a minor
> release, if we're interpreting the version as the standard
> <major>.<minor>.<bugfix> scheme, even if we end up pushing some stuff
> off to 1.7.
>
> --
> Christopher L Tubbs II
> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com> wrote:
> > True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if the
> > features contained within are incomplete.
> >
> > There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that would all
> fall
> > into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back out large
> > changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug fixes" and
> > not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new features
> which
> > I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
> >
> > I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the guy who
> > throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing the
> quality
> > of our release.
> >
> >
> > On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
> >>
> >> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time. I'll
> >> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
> >>>
> >>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues
> >>>
> >>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
> >>> ask for one :)
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Christopher L Tubbs II
> >>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vines@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week
> away.
> >>>
> >>> If
> >>>>
> >>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please speak
> up
> >>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>


-- 
Sean

--047d7b6d95d0ce4f7704e9960ccb--