Mailing-List: contact core-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: core-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-Id: <74778F9D-F797-4704-B3D2-4894B79E81C1@cse.unl.edu>
From: Brian Bockelman <bbockelm@cse.unl.edu>
To: core-dev@hadoop.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <4A1E68FA.7040901@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3)
Subject: Re: 0.19.2 release needed
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 07:24:52 -0500
References: <C642EBFA.6C0D%scott@richrelevance.com>
 <5306B0B8-7CF7-4122-A975-35DA25D2B19F@cse.unl.edu>
 <4A1E68FA.7040901@apache.org>


On May 28, 2009, at 5:35 AM, Steve Loughran wrote:

> Brian Bockelman wrote:
>> Hey Scott,
>> We use 0.19.1 (plus some patches) heavily.  The other CMS sites use  
>> the same version -- represents about 600TB of user community :)
>
> presumably this means you have enough of a cluster to do some  
> testing on an RC?

Yup, we've got one you could take out for a spin -- one of the HDFS  
installs is fairly sizable, but doesn't hold anything important yet.

>
>> I'd be interested in seeing a 0.19.2 released.  I was kind of  
>> hoping lasting for a few months more on 0.19.x and then skip to  
>> 0.21.x prior to LHC startup.
>
> So you've got geneva to hold back on going live until 0.21.x is  
> stable?

;) You have to remember that we're relatively very small in a very big  
picture.  That statement was just one of optimism about the 0.21.x  
schedule.

Brian