accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bill Havanki <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Dev branches reflecting minor/major versions, not bugfixes
Date Mon, 12 May 2014 15:10:36 GMT
I like this plan overall. I am definitely in favor of more frequent,
lighter-weight bugfix releases. We can start to move toward a regular
schedule of them, based on whether there is enough there to warrant one
each month / two months / whatever.

We could start by branching off 1.6.0 now, and merging in whatever bug fix
commits make sense (pending a discussion as Christopher suggested). It can
be kept in a ready-to-release condition, for whenever it's "time" for 1.6.1.

What about 1.5.x? That will still receive feature changes as well as bug
fixes, I assume, until it goes EOL.

On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Josh Elser <> wrote:

> On 5/12/14, 10:41 AM, Keith Turner wrote:
>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Josh Elser<>  wrote:
>>  >SGTM. Looks like there aren't currently any fixes of much substance for
>>> >1.6.1 presently, but there are a few that would make for a very-low
>>> impact
>>> >1.6.1, and a good 1.5.2 which also includes the fallout tickets shortly
>>> >after 1.5.1. Timeframe looks good to me too.
>>> >
>>> >If we can get that reduced test burden for "real" bug-fix releases
>>> >hammered out, a month sounds good to me.
>> Rather than reduce the test burden, it would be nice to make the cluster
>> testing more automated like you and other have discussed.
> I think that would be a good parallel goal, but I would still think that 7
> days of testing for a bug-fix release is excessive. Most times for me the
> pain is getting resources to test for such a long period, not necessarily
> setting up the test.

// Bill Havanki
// Solutions Architect, Cloudera Govt Solutions
// 443.686.9283

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message