falcon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Praveen Adlakha <praveen.adla...@inmobi.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Falcon 1.0
Date Fri, 02 Sep 2016 16:39:47 GMT
I agree with the idea that 1.0 is next logical milestone for the project
and I like going ahead with option 1.

If we need some critical fixes in 0.10 we can make an interim release.

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Venkat Ranganathan <
vranganathan@hortonworks.com> wrote:

> +1 to do a 1.0  release (we can do with 0.10 + bug fixes).
>
> Rest can follow post 1.0
>
> Venkat
> ________________________________________
> From: Pallavi Rao <pallavi.rao@inmobi.com>
> Sent: Friday, September 02, 2016 1:53 AM
> To: dev@falcon.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Falcon 1.0
>
> +1 for Option 1. Falcon is no longer in its infancy and warrants 1.x
> releases.
>
> When we do the marketable features, we can do a 2.0. :-)
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Srikanth Sundarrajan <sriksun@hotmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Agreed. Will initiate a parallel thread in some time to discuss that,
> > while we continue to invite views on 1.0 release on this.
> > RegardsSrikanth Sundarrajan
> >
> > > From: ajayyadava@apache.org
> > > Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 06:36:09 +0000
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Falcon 1.0
> > > To: dev@falcon.apache.org
> > >
> > > Hello Srikanth,
> > >
> > > Excellent point. I think everyone is in favor of API stability and
> > > versioning irrespective of 1.0 or not, however I suspect it may mean
> > > different things for different people(e.g. backward incompatible?). I
> > think
> > > it will be useful to have that discussion again in open to bring
> everyone
> > > on same page. Would you like to start a discuss thread with summary of
> > your
> > > thoughts?
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Ajay Yadava
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:55 AM Srikanth Sundarrajan <
> sriksun@hotmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Am +1 for 1.0 release and also feel that newer and more attractive
> > > > features can follow. I dont know if there was any outcome on the
> > approach
> > > > to API versioning discussion that we had earlier this year, we should
> > > > re-initiate that discussion and close if there is general consensus
> > for 1.0.
> > > > RegardsSrikanth Sundarrajan
> > > >
> > > > > From: ajayyadava@apache.org
> > > > > Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 14:55:53 +0000
> > > > > Subject: [DISCUSS] Apache Falcon 1.0
> > > > > To: dev@falcon.apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello everyone,
> > > > >
> > > > > Now that 0.10 has been successfully released, thanks to heroic
> > efforts of
> > > > > Balu, I think it is time to start discussion on our long pending
> 1.0
> > > > > release :) I specifically want to discuss the following items.
> > > > >
> > > > > *Scope / Change Threshold for calling it 1.0*
> > > > >
> > > > > We need to decide on the bare minimum changes to call it 1.0  I
> know
> > at
> > > > > least 2 views on this in the community
> > > > >
> > > > >    1. First view is that 1.0 is all about API stability, Once we
> have
> > > > >    stabilized the existing API, we can call it 1.0. There are
> already
> > > > some
> > > > >    changes committed to trunk like a new shell, moving post
> > processing to
> > > > >    server side, REST API Revamp and some more lifecycle changes
> which
> > > > will
> > > > >    definitely come in 1.0 This should be enough to do a meaningful
> > 1.0
> > > > release.
> > > > >    2. Another view is that we need to have lot of marketable
> > features and
> > > > >    new capabilities to call it 1.0 so that we can publicize it
> enough
> > > > and ask
> > > > >    audience to reconsider falcon even if they found Apache Falcon
> > short
> > > > for
> > > > >    their use cases.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please chime in with your thoughts :)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > *Call for Volunteer*
> > > > >
> > > > > As discussed in last developer sync up, Pragya communicated to me
> > that
> > > > she
> > > > > has very high work load at her office and will not be able to take
> > out
> > > > time
> > > > > for release activities. If there are any committers who haven't yet
> > done
> > > > a
> > > > > release and want to volunteer for 1.0, then please reply to this
> > thread,
> > > > > else I will assume the role of Release Manager for 1.0. Many
> release
> > > > > activities require karma available only to committers, hence only
> > > > > committers can volunteer.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Ajay Yadava
> > > >
> >
> >
>
> --
> _____________________________________________________________
> The information contained in this communication is intended solely for the
> use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others
> authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally privileged
> information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified
> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance
> on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be
> unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
> us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your
> system. The firm is neither liable for the proper and complete transmission
> of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its
> receipt.
>

-- 
_____________________________________________________________
The information contained in this communication is intended solely for the 
use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others 
authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified 
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance 
on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be 
unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify 
us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your 
system. The firm is neither liable for the proper and complete transmission 
of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its 
receipt.

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