hadoop-common-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli <vino...@hortonworks.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] - Release 2.0.5-beta
Date Wed, 15 May 2013 19:19:31 GMT

I also feel that some of YARN-397 should go in. If you also feel so, please put in a +1 to
state your intention.

Thanks,
+Vinod

On May 15, 2013, at 11:32 AM, Alejandro Abdelnur wrote:

> Do we need to add YARN-397?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Karthik Kambatla <kasha@cloudera.com>wrote:
> 
>> Hi Arun,
>> 
>> Can we add HADOOP-9517 to the list - having compatibility guidelines should
>> help us support users and downstream projects better?
>> 
>> Thanks
>> Karthik
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Arun C Murthy <acm@hortonworks.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Folks,
>>> 
>>> A considerable number of people have expressed confusion regarding the
>>> recent vote on 2.0.5, beta status etc. given lack of specifics, the
>> voting
>>> itself (validity of the vote itself, whose votes are binding) etc.
>>> 
>>> IMHO technical arguments (incompatibility b/w 2.0 & 2.1, current
>> stability
>>> of 3 features under debate etc.) have been lost in the discussion in
>> favor
>>> of non-technical (almost dramatic) nuances such as "seizing the moment".
>>> There is now dangerous talk of tolerating incompatibility b/w 2.0 and
>> 2.1)
>>> - this is a red flag for me; particularly when there are just 3 features
>>> being debated and active committers and contributors are confident of and
>>> ready to stand by their work. All patches, I believe, are ready to be
>>> merged in the the next few days per discussions on jira. This will,
>>> clearly, not delay the other API work which everyone agrees is crucial.
>> As
>>> a result, I feel no recourse but to restart a new vote - all attempts at
>>> calm, reasoned, civil discussion based on technical arguments have come
>> to
>>> naught - I apologize for the thrash caused to everyone's attention.
>>> 
>>> To get past all of this confusion, I'd like to present an alternate,
>>> specific proposal for consideration.
>>> 
>>> I propose we continue the original plan and make a 2.0.5-beta release by
>>> May end with the following content:
>>> # HDFS-347
>>> # HDFS Snapshots
>>> # Windows support
>>> # Necessary & final API/protocol changes such as:
>>> * Final YARN API changes: YARN-386
>>> * MR Binary Compatibility: MAPREDUCE-5108
>>> * Final RPC cleanup: HADOOP-8990
>>> 
>>> People working on the above features have all expressed considerable
>>> comfort with them and are ready to stand-by to help expedite any
>> necessary
>>> bug-fixes etc. to get to stabilization quickly. I'm confident we can get
>>> this release out by end of May. This sets stage for a hadoop-2.x GA
>> release
>>> right after with some more testing - this means I think I can quickly
>> turn
>>> around and make bug-fix releases as necessary right after 2.0.5-beta.
>>> 
>>> I request that people consider helping out with this plan and sign up to
>>> help push hadoop-2.x to stability as outlined above. I believe this will
>>> help achieve our shared goals of quickly stabilizing hadoop-2 and help
>>> ensure we can support it for forseeable future in a compatible manner for
>>> the benefit of our users and downstream projects.
>>> 
>>> Please vote, the vote will run the normal 7 days. Obviously, I'm +1.
>>> 
>>> thanks,
>>> Arun
>>> 
>>> PS: To keep this discussion grounded in technical details I've moved this
>>> to dev@ (bcc general@).
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Alejandro


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