Return-Path: 
 <common-dev-return-81585-apmail-hadoop-common-dev-archive=hadoop.apache.org@hadoop.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-hadoop-common-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-common-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 76A1BF3B1
	for <apmail-hadoop-common-dev-archive@www.apache.org>;
 Sat, 27 Apr 2013 01:07:06 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 12715 invoked by uid 500); 27 Apr 2013 01:07:04 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-common-dev-archive@hadoop.apache.org
Received: (qmail 12591 invoked by uid 500); 27 Apr 2013 01:07:04 -0000
Mailing-List: contact common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:common-dev@hadoop.apache.org>
List-Id: <common-dev.hadoop.apache.org>
Reply-To: common-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list common-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Received: (qmail 12578 invoked by uid 99); 27 Apr 2013 01:07:04 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 01:07:04 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=5.0
	tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of acm@hortonworks.com designates
 209.85.192.174 as permitted sender)
Received: from [209.85.192.174] (HELO mail-pd0-f174.google.com)
 (209.85.192.174)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 01:06:56 +0000
Received: by mail-pd0-f174.google.com with SMTP id y13so2346474pdi.19
        for <common-dev@hadoop.apache.org>;
 Fri, 26 Apr 2013 18:06:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=google.com; s=20120113;
        h=x-received:from:mime-version:content-type:subject:date:in-reply-to
         :to:references:message-id:x-mailer:x-gm-message-state;
        bh=Q3Cu9Omwfo744Aa13QKf6hgfmSbqJbbWMhxv/X5ohR4=;
        b=TX0sLmrnSY8SE1AOW8IqAtt/vqvlscRTOQB2Nh3ShubccNk7+ws0v+2DKtjUCV9w9t
         d69oqkG/SWM/FoIcvCQjoXr0mcSnJ+ahVqPNnnJ1TX5d6tWm9cIvo6MSD4YFzwwYxvxZ
         64KYtjmFzDMP27ZBlF0Rvgk2ZyREcS3OdADUaUCwydO+dmn9Y187sGf5vL8MOyVYYi53
         AZe9sW8wfnTEt80bv291VeNDc6DXVtxGs5pr/+kXEMYos0EwZiNAa9y9m4jDAt5Os1Yo
         3T3n/mu4RT3m94wUBPeK2aq9c9S7sqwwUIkh3kBSq8iF/vow+x90bNoiPT7Gvma+8Urm
         cxZQ==
X-Received: by 10.68.113.65 with SMTP id iw1mr60739200pbb.31.1367024795360;
        Fri, 26 Apr 2013 18:06:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.11.3.189] (host1.hortonworks.com. [70.35.59.2])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id
 b7sm13626508pba.39.2013.04.26.18.06.32
        for <multiple recipients>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Fri, 26 Apr 2013 18:06:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Arun C Murthy <acm@hortonworks.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-197-23051114
Subject: Re: Heads up - 2.0.5-beta
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 18:06:31 -0700
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKtuutE2kRYcJ1fK8P67uU6U3HTrLk-2xCXjKVLj=hemhJ33SQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: common-dev@hadoop.apache.org,
 yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org,
 hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org,
 mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org
References: <9408D111-C1D3-448C-A2E3-266A8CF4E176@hortonworks.com>
 <CADdVdVGpE_cbL8vCoYK=a31jLDpZ-yK7gnJBVdm_CjxuMmc2sQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKtuutE2kRYcJ1fK8P67uU6U3HTrLk-2xCXjKVLj=hemhJ33SQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-Id: <D9EF83A7-E670-4639-8177-A590BF721B28@hortonworks.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
X-Gm-Message-State: 
 ALoCoQkE2kkSzy0lJ3A4/DgIvCvIdVS7Emm0Cpqkx5loAkIs9Mk5r2y5Lm2iwITJHogeKIJYuGch
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

--Apple-Mail-197-23051114
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii

Konstantin,

On Apr 26, 2013, at 4:34 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:

> Do you think we can call the version you proposed to release
> 2.1.0 or 2.1.0-beta?
>=20
> The proposed new features imho do not exactly conform with the idea
> of dot-dot release, but definitely qualify for a major number change.
> I am just trying to avoid rather ugly 2.0.4.1 versions, which of =
course
> also possible.

I'm agnostic to the schemes.=20

During the long discussion we had just 2 months ago, I proposed that =
2.1.x be the beta series initially.

The feedback and consensus was that it wasn't the right numbering =
scheme:
http://s.apache.org/1j4

thanks,
Arun

--Apple-Mail-197-23051114--