hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Eric Baldeschwieler <eri...@yahoo-inc.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Hadoop Security Release off Yahoo! patchset
Date Wed, 12 Jan 2011 21:53:23 GMT
Let me second arun here.

This is incremental work on 0.20.  We're happy to support any branch naming strategy the community
likes, but sticking with 20.<minor> seems like the right default approach.  

Let's discuss 1.0 issues on another thread.  Our priority is to get our work into other folks


On Jan 12, 2011, at 1:34 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:

> I'm willing to discuss any and all options, for a very short period.
> Technically you have a reasonable point, Doug has suggested this in  
> the past too. If everyone agrees, fine; if not, I'm do not want hung  
> up on a release number. I just *do not* want a controversy.
> As I mentioned, I'm looking to finish this up in a couple of weeks;  
> so, I could do without a long discussion on the on the critical path.
> I'm happy to go with a reasonable compromise, if not, hadoop-0.20.100  
> is what I'm priming for.
> Heck, if Stack wants to call the append release (not sure how far  
> ahead he is) as hadoop-0.20.100, I'm willing to call this  
> hadoop-0.20.200.
> All I care about is having a distinct release number from 0.20.2 (our  
> last stable release). Again, I just want to get a release into the  
> hands of our users. Please, let's resolve this quickly. Please.
> Arun
> On Jan 12, 2011, at 1:10 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote:
>> On Jan 11, 2011, at 9:09 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
>>> I'm open to suggestions - how about something like 20.100 to show
>>> that it's a big jump? Anything else?
>> Although I'm not wild about any of the potential release names, this
>> patch set is neither a subset or superset of the 0.21 or 0.22
>> branches. Given that, I think that a new major release number makes
>> the most sense. It is also relatively likely that additional minor
>> releases will be made off of this branch while 0.22 is stabilizing.
>> We've talked about declaring 0.20 a 1.0 for a long time and this feels
>> like backing into the decision, but technically, I believe it to be
>> the right name for such a release.
>> Thoughts?
>> -- Owen

View raw message