Mailing-List: contact general-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@hadoop.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082)
Subject: Re: Plans for the 0.22 Release
From: Ian Holsman <hadoop@holsman.net>
In-Reply-To: <05ED6FF7-6236-47F4-B5DD-8E927971C72D@apache.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 07:26:23 +1100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <39694716-7EF6-41B8-8862-D2DE03A4560C@Holsman.NET>
References: <27F4E872-C226-4386-9148-077F0044B6E9@Holsman.net>
 <05ED6FF7-6236-47F4-B5DD-8E927971C72D@apache.org>
To: general@hadoop.apache.org


On Dec 17, 2010, at 6:15 AM, Owen O'Malley wrote:

>=20
> On Dec 16, 2010, at 10:54 AM, Ian Holsman wrote:
>=20
>> how are we going with the 0.22 release.
>=20
> Progress has been blocked because HADOOP-6685 is still blocked. I feel =
that HADOOP-6685 is critical for Hadoop and don't see much point in =
working on a 0.22 release without it.

While it may be critical, I still don't understand why we couldn't =
release without it, and carry on the discussion.=20
Putting so much emphasis and pressure on this issue is unwarranted.=20

Everyone who has discussed this patch has said it isn't critical to =
hadoop, and It's holding up everything else 0.22 is going to bring.=20
There are now 4 separate companies who have released their own 0.20 =
version because of the delay on our releasing...
Delaying this release another 2-3 months for a single patch seems a bit =
extreme to me.

=20

> In particular, HADOOP-6685 removes the need for third party =
serialization libraries that work around the current limitations of the =
MapReduce framework, but splinter the user community.
>=20
> If someone else wants to take over as release manager for 0.22 while =
we find a solution to make forward progress on HADOOP-6685, that would =
be fine.
>=20
> -- Owen