Mailing-List: contact general-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@hadoop.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of saint.ack@gmail.com designates
 209.85.221.198 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        b=QsAE0fgyTggaPicfg3HyTCiVQT+9wHmbjKt9vMNmiNsQuwNCqZo0R0uiK1/IjNQV94
         ZjwaPhekHUkJ3HtwlRPCzqLh/Fbz0kCxTIghmOp01DECOnjzzWH/v70Ax732YXNQpVhC
         3xlxEhgbBQbCkwv63iVRb4qIpHrb7mrRuSs8o=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: saint.ack@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <656B2F92-03D7-46AB-B49B-C8CBFE2F8BA9@speakeasy.net>
References: <656B2F92-03D7-46AB-B49B-C8CBFE2F8BA9@speakeasy.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 11:51:41 -0700
Message-ID: <7c962aed1003191151g18b6efc3m5b89385ade5cc29f@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 0.21 Release
From: Stack <stack@duboce.net>
To: general@hadoop.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Jeremy Davis <jerdavis@speakeasy.net> wrote:
> ...and I also saw release 0.21 as is with stack as the release manager. Was
> there a final decision on this off list?
>

On the above, I was toying with the idea of being release manager for
releasing as hadoop 0.21.0 what is in current 0.21 hadoop branch but I
subsequently decided against it after chatting with folks and figuring
that the only group that seemed interested in driving a release of the
hadoop 0.21 branch was the hbase crew.  If I were to guess, an hadoop
vouched for by a couple of hbasers with their spotty hdfs and
mapreduce knowledge probably wouldn't have the penetration of a
release backed by, say, a Yahoo.  No one would trust their data to
such a release.  If no data in hadoop 0.21 clusters, hbase wouldn't
have anything to run against.  So I let it go and figured time could
be spent better elsewhere; e.g. helping test the set of patches that
could get us a sync/flush/append on a patched hadoop 0.20 (hdfs-200,
etc.).

Sorry, I should have added a note to cited thread that I'd wandered...

St.Ack