Return-Path: 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 6D5CD18B47 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 19:45:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 60165 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2015 19:45:48 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-common-dev-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 60023 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2015 19:45:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: common-dev@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list common-dev@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 59972 invoked by uid 99); 2 Nov 2015 19:45:47 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 02 Nov 2015 19:45:47 +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 5077F1A2C1F; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 19:45:47 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.999 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2=1.999, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-us-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 zqCUvzbZ6Ffz; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 19:45:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relayvx11b.securemail.intermedia.net (relayvx11b.securemail.intermedia.net [64.78.52.184]) by mx1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 0856C23851; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 19:45:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from securemail.intermedia.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by emg-ca-1-1.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DCAD53FB4; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:45:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: continuing releases on Apache Hadoop 2.6.x MIME-Version: 1.0 x-echoworx-msg-id: 68418c5f-b768-45eb-add1-c24cb75effb1 x-echoworx-emg-received: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:45:32.880 -0800 x-echoworx-action: delivered Received: from 10.254.155.14 ([10.254.155.14]) by emg-ca-1-1 (JAMES SMTP Server 2.3.2) with SMTP ID 922; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:45:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from MBX080-W4-CO-2.exch080.serverpod.net (unknown [10.224.117.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by emg-ca-1-1.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7D7D53FA8; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:45:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from MBX080-W4-CO-2.exch080.serverpod.net (10.224.117.102) by MBX080-W4-CO-2.exch080.serverpod.net (10.224.117.102) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1044.25; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:45:31 -0800 Received: from MBX080-W4-CO-2.exch080.serverpod.net ([10.224.117.102]) by mbx080-w4-co-2.exch080.serverpod.net ([10.224.117.102]) with mapi id 15.00.1044.021; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:45:31 -0800 From: Vinod Vavilapalli To: "common-dev@hadoop.apache.org" CC: "hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org" , "yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org" , "mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org" Thread-Topic: continuing releases on Apache Hadoop 2.6.x Thread-Index: AQHRFaTp9NcPtMbgFk+bFIal2my0cp6JqOCA Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 19:45:30 +0000 Message-ID: <72DE0DA1-0846-48BA-B5CB-7394CD2F77CE@hortonworks.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [192.175.27.17] x-source-routing-agent: Processed Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <5643BF9E9C00AF4A8437A38A9626C055@exch080.serverpod.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just to stress on the following, it is very important that any critical bug= -fixes that we push into 2.8.0 or even trunk, we should consider them for 2= .6.3 and 2.7.3 if it makes sense. This is the only way we can avoid extreme= ly long release cycles like that of 2.6.1. Also, to clarify a little, use Target-version if you want a discussion of t= he backport, but if you do end up backporting patches after that, you shoul= d set the fix-version to be 2.6.1. Thanks +Vinod > On Nov 2, 2015, at 11:29 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote: >=20 > As you may have seen, 2.6.2 is out > . I have also retargeted all > open issues that were targeted for 2.6.2 to 2.6.3. >=20 > Continuing the discussion in the email thread here > , I'd like us to maintain th= e > cadence of monthly point releases in the 2.6.x line. It would be great if > we can have 2.6.3 released before the year-end holidays. >=20 > If you have any bugfixes and improvements that are targeted for 2.7.x (or > 2.8) that you think are applicable to 2.6.x, please *set the target versi= on > to 2.6.3* and merge them to branch-2.6. Please use your judgment in terms > of the applicability and quality of the changes so that we can ensure eac= h > point release is consistently better quality than the previous one. Thank= s > everyone! >=20 > Regards, > Sangjin