hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ian Holsman <had...@holsman.net>
Subject Re: bringing the codebases back in line
Date Sat, 23 Oct 2010 01:33:27 GMT
I think we should push forward to 0.22 as well.
The question then becomes what should be in it.

2010/10/22 Mahadev Konar <mahadev@yahoo-inc.com>

> +1 for moving to 0.22 trunk.
>
> Thanks
> mahadev
>
>
> On 10/22/10 3:03 PM, "Konstantin Boudnik" <cos@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > +1 on moving forward to common 0.22 trunk. 0.20 was dragging on for quite
> a
> > long time and, in a sense, create certain imbalance toward 0.20-centric
> > Hadoop environment
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 02:52PM, Eli Collins wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Ian Holsman <hadoop@holsman.net>
> wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Milind A Bhandarkar
> >>> <milindb@yahoo-inc.com>wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> but the other question I have which hopefully you guys can answer
is
> does
> >>>>> the yahoo distribution have ALL the patches from the trunk on it?
> because
> >>>> if
> >>>>> it doesn't I think that is problematic as well for other reasons.
> >>>>
> >>>> What are these "other" reasons ?
> >>>
> >>> yahoo distribution runs on our production clusters, and I do not see
> why any
> >>>> production cluster should run code from trunk.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> right.. the trunk is not for production use. ═I wasn't suggesting that.
> >>>
> >>> but the trunk is what will eventually become the next release.
> >>>
> >>> Then someone in yahoo will have to decide if they are going to move to
> >>> rebase their production cluster to 0.21, or just continue back-porting
> what
> >>> they need to the version they are running on their clusters.
> >>>
> >>> and if yahoo fixes a bug in their version, it would need to be
> >>> forward-ported over to the current trunk. which will get harder and
> harder
> >>> as the paths diverge.
> >>>
> >>> I'm sure you've seen it happen on other projects when a major branch
> lands
> >>> on the trunk, and the amount of effort it takes to reconcile them.
> >>
> >> Hey Ian,
> >>
> >> I think we're all in agreement that we need to re-convene on a common
> >> branch that removes most of the deltas against an Apache release that
> >> we have all accumulated (primarily security, append, trunk backports).
> >> The open question is whether we try to come up with a common 20-based
> >> branch or wait for 22.  That's been previously discussed on this list
> >> and there were some concerns, re-iterated on this thread, that we
> >> should invest in 22 rather than the current 20-based branches.
> >>
> >> Our current plan is to reconvene with everyone on 22 - a well-tested
> >> release with security and append should get users off the current
> >> 20-based branches. However if you and/or the Apache community feels
> >> that there needs to be an Apache 20-based branch and release that
> >> reflects what people are using (security, append, various backports in
> >> YDH/CDH) we are willing to create and maintain this branch on Apache.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Eli
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> ═- Milind
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Milind Bhandarkar
> >>> (mailto:milindb@yahoo-inc.com)
> >>> (phone: 408-203-5213 W)
> >>>
>
>

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