Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-accumulo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-accumulo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CE1DB18BD0 for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2015 16:59:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 26165 invoked by uid 500); 8 Jul 2015 16:59:13 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-accumulo-dev-archive@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 26122 invoked by uid 500); 8 Jul 2015 16:59:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@accumulo.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 26110 invoked by uid 99); 8 Jul 2015 16:59:13 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Jul 2015 16:59:13 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id D9A7E1A6BB8 for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2015 16:59:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.099 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd2-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-eu-west.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4cvQHRE-tmkf for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2015 16:59:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-f180.google.com (mail-qk0-f180.google.com [209.85.220.180]) by mx1-eu-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-eu-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 9288420DA6 for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2015 16:59:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qkei195 with SMTP id i195so167467362qke.3 for ; Wed, 08 Jul 2015 09:58:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gxwdLO4bebODJrV/x6bqlJnjrj/1jStRIkRfkk6xT7k=; b=j9H0F/SOuKtv4n3dcazK+Y345bq+bR1tWypLHGzIrqQccBwr+EWvSTKDro9wBfWCds y5sGlfDwj+TGPYas/G/7Ym0uz0GfBXZDWp/ZEvHMXWg1vGlIC2Qk4z4Fj0SsmE3Gaz3V ocl7ejZIM1pHZewRx6pTEgFFYFZUAk2/i5eWNJq31oEeLI6PcPnZ8pG7sT03xkcM/NFU PG4IT+gS0l50nXyAYtuNEKpTgGe9Q3XQGLLgarD82rQgCBHf9SsxdmQ3JLLPgyRIOkSY tGaMWw+tFgnMhuLddpgoiqPDYz14g86VXrtYv3KwwN+Bao5himZJdlq3sadh/CwcivA+ lcEg== X-Received: by 10.55.22.167 with SMTP id 39mr17937190qkw.42.1436374734656; Wed, 08 Jul 2015 09:58:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hw10447.local (pool-68-134-10-53.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net. [68.134.10.53]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id n103sm468620qkh.31.2015.07.08.09.58.53 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 08 Jul 2015 09:58:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <559D56D1.2050700@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2015 12:58:57 -0400 From: Josh Elser User-Agent: Postbox 3.0.11 (Macintosh/20140602) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@accumulo.apache.org Subject: Re: Post 1.5.3 and 1.6.3 References: <559ADF69.9010901@gmail.com> <559C2A24.2020908@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Do you think we didn't cover that appropriately in the ANNOUNCE email and/or the release notes? I wouldn't have expected anything more from Hadoop Weekly than "apache foo x.y.z, 1-2 high-level changes, read more _here_" Sean Busbey wrote: > I think we also need a formal announcement that the branch is EOM and may > only be resuscitated for critical security issues (and may not at that). > > To illustrate the need, I noticed the 1.5.3 release made Hadoop Weekly but > there was no mention that it is the last expected 1.5.z release. > > On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Christopher wrote: > >> Good point. >> >> On Tue, Jul 7, 2015, 15:36 Josh Elser wrote: >> >>> Upgrade testing out of 1.5.x to 1.6 or 1.7? >>> >>> Christopher wrote: >>>> What else is there to do for 1.5 EOL? We've indicated this already in >>>> the 1.5.3 release announcement and we've removed the 1.5 development >>>> branch. As far as I'm concerned, I think the last remaining thing to >>>> do is to archive the 1.5 parts of the website... and I see no >>>> particular rush for that. We can do it along with the next minor or >>>> major release. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Christopher L Tubbs II >>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Sean Busbey >>> wrote: >>>>> I'd like to see the 1.5 EOL happen. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Josh Elser >>> wrote: >>>>>> Thanks to the efforts spearheaded by Christopher and verified by >>> everyone >>>>>> else, we now have 1.5.3 and 1.6.3 releases! >>>>>> >>>>>> To keep the ball rolling, what's next? High level questions that come >>> to >>>>>> mind... >>>>>> >>>>>> * When do we do 1.7.1 and/or 1.8.0? >>>>>> * What bug-fixes do we have outstanding for 1.7.1? >>>>>> * What other minor improvements do people want for 1.8.0? >>>>>> * Where does 2.0.0 stand? Should we make a bigger effort to getting >> the >>>>>> new client API stuff Christopher had started into Apache? >>>>>> >>>>>> Feel free to brainstorm here and/or on JIRA (tagging relevant issues >> to >>>>>> the desired fixVersion) >>>>>> >>>>>> - Josh >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Sean > > >