Mailing-List: contact general-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@hadoop.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of ndaley@mac.com designates
 17.148.16.99 as permitted sender)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Sun-Java-System-SMTP-Warning: Lines longer than SMTP allows found and wrapped.
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Hadoop Security Release off Yahoo! patchset
From: Nigel Daley <ndaley@mac.com>
In-reply-to: <B5106571-EF43-4FE1-B73E-3A1C13AEC2EE@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 11:58:06 -0800
Message-id: <D0AF4825-358F-472F-9718-07E162355CDC@mac.com>
References: <516684F5-0052-4381-805D-760B61DECB16@yahoo-inc.com>
 <366A9E58-5BD7-497D-9AE1-229959ED4065@apache.org>
 <18C5C999-4680-4684-BC55-A430C40FD746@yahoo-inc.com>
 <AANLkTim+y7CBi8WeV9W+FVckn-1D1SAV2hSc6RnEebSn@mail.gmail.com>
 <F8414465-24F2-4F40-97F1-B13048820F24@yahoo-inc.com>
 <D7FA8ED2-D9C6-4B45-AC3B-9E965ADD9F5D@apache.org>
 <2A07F1E6-7096-493B-B92E-89938689DD50@yahoo-inc.com>
 <5CDDF962-5828-459F-87C3-5033EC21E9BF@mac.com>
 <075308A1-129B-4BF7-8924-C04EC6106D3E@yahoo-inc.com>
 <AANLkTimbXjRTTmEXiY1wweFfNGKmc5aWKw9D03J7gjBg@mail.gmail.com>
 <388582DF-FC85-49D1-A89C-1F36CE34A0E2@yahoo-inc.com>
 <AANLkTim=+8_WBNbxU43xwH50WT8UQwbac_mR8FQ+0jjz@mail.gmail.com>
 <04705B3C-49A9-46B3-8AA9-5673EFBDE544@yahoo-inc.com>
 <AANLkTinAk+8YNLHb580uFibMWtNc=oYdqq+sOdBc+=6U@mail.gmail.com>
 <74BDFA74-DB12-4109-89DF-B353FC7296C4@yahoo-inc.com>
 <AANLkTimLLrfYbaaOzbEV9dcsaMFLeMmdgx73FasdxGhA@mail.gmail.com>
 <B4C8E6B2-A343-449B-AE63-DE5E3F883ABA@yahoo-inc.com>
 <00F14279-2802-4CC3-91AC-481AE257FD8B@yahoo-inc.com>
 <AANLkTikqbRrU+3+y2nctu7RzKNb7+P8kd=4az+eQHzKW@mail.gmail.com>
 <58FF3525-B734-44A0-A5C6-45282A23F06F@yahoo-inc.com>
 <AANLkTik-=ZDac0iEbYuDHeBrRosQ3JNGvRbf7MxexQND@mail.gmail.com>
 <7D4397E2-B618-4BD1-8E1E-08B1C598B76F@yahoo-inc.com>
 <10BA9684-51FF-4332-A2FD-5F648E0AAF8C@Holsman.NET>
 <AANLkTi=0pFkfM+0jMq+f-X7w9tMGd7_oovh0QfUrX6Mj@mail.gmail.com>
 <2C71D87C-D7BF-4993-B0F9-05E455E9CC77@mac.com>
 <AANLkTik_WB518PKGLhBS5qSJHG=RQQBCC5O0L7UWmc5_@mail.gmail.com>
 <B5106571-EF43-4FE1-B73E-3A1C13AEC2EE@yahoo-inc.com>
To: general@hadoop.apache.org

Eric, Arun, I'd like to explicitly clarify one aspect of this branch and what you mean by 'release' -- it can have many meanings.

Are you asking to actually create an Apache release from this branch (binary & source)?  Or, as I was assuming, simply commit all this code to this branch and leave it there without a formal release so others can role their own binary if they wish?

Thanks,
Nige


On Jan 14, 2011, at 10:30 AM, Eric Baldeschwieler wrote:

> Yup. Letting people who want to contribute, do so a good meme!
> 
> A stable next release would be great. But orgs do sustaining on stable code releases for a lot of very good reasons. 
> 
> A next Hadoop 21+ of this code quality is almost a year away in my opinion. 
> 
> ---
> E14 - via iPhone
> 
> On Jan 14, 2011, at 10:05 AM, "Jakob Homan" <jghoman@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>> On another thread discussing hadoop-0.20-append as a separate branch, most people agreed that new features shouldn't be added to 0.20, now we have a major feature and we are all gung ho for it..
>> 
>> Not all are.  I'm against it for the all the same reasons I was
>> against 20 append.  This is also being used as a wedge to get the
>> append work in as .200.  My position is that every iota effort of
>> releasing another 20 branch is an iota not spent on getting us a
>> kick-ass 22.  20 was great, and we had a lot of wonderful times
>> together, but it's time to move on and see other releases.
>> 
>> But, this is a volunteer effort, and if others want to put the effort
>> in, they're free to do so.
>> -jg
>> 
>> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Nigel Daley <ndaley@mac.com> wrote:
>>> Yup, I'll say it again.  The process ain't perfect but it's good enough IMO. Thank you Yahoo! for your contribution.
>>> 
>>> Clearly these patch will need review before commit when going into trunk.
>>> 
>>> Let's move on to 0.22.
>>> 
>>> Nige
>>> 
>>> On Jan 14, 2011, at 9:20 AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I tend to second most of Ian's points here.
>>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 06:14, Ian Holsman <hadoop@holsman.net> wrote:
>>>>> (with my Apache hat on)
>>>>> I'm -0.5 on doing this as one big mega-patch and not including append (as opposed to a series of smaller patches).
>>>> 
>>>> #1: we are creating a precedent of a "brain-dump" here. Although, it
>>>> isn't the first one in the history of OSS. Infamous Apple "patch" to
>>>> OpenBSD is another one ;)
>>>> 
>>>> #2: How to spell 'back door' any one?
>>>> 
>>>> #5: "almost 10 internal releases" Arun has mentioned above might be,
>>>> perhaps, considered as a great quality control effort. Also, not to
>>>> mention virtual impossibility to create a test plan to validate a
>>>> giant features patch.
>>>> 
>>>>> BTW, I'd like to point out a discrepancy here:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On another thread discussing hadoop-0.20-append as a separate branch, most people agreed that new features shouldn't be added to 0.20, now we have a major feature and we are all gung ho for it..
>>>> 
>>>> And this ^^^
>>>> 
>>>> But, hey I guess it's totally worth it!
>>>> Cos
>>>> 
>>>>> --Ian
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Jan 14, 2011, at 2:21 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Jan 13, 2011, at 10:59 PM, Stack wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> (Man, it was looking good there for a second when 0.20.100 was about
>>>>>>> security+append!)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Good luck w/ the release Arun.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> We might be following your 0.20.100 with a 0.20.200 append.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Super!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Arun
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>>