hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Roy T. Fielding" <field...@gbiv.com>
Subject Re: Discussions - Re: [VOTE] Release candidate 0.20.203.0-rc0
Date Tue, 03 May 2011 00:41:26 GMT
On May 2, 2011, at 12:15 PM, Ian Holsman wrote:

> moving this thread to general@
> 
> On May 3, 2011, at 3:58 AM, Doug Cutting wrote:
> 
>>> Should we release
>>> http://people.apache.org/~omalley/hadoop-0.20.203.0-rc0/?
>> 
>> The patch selection process for this branch did not appear to be a
>> community process.  A massive patch set was committed en-masse with no
>> public discussion before or after about its specific composition.
> 
> guys...
> 1. do we agree this is an issue

Of course it is an issue.  Anyone can make it an issue -- no
agreement is necessary.

> 2. if it is, how we do get the communication & discussion on list?

By communicating and discussing on list.  Like, for example,
by proposing a release vote and people objecting to it, followed
by a polite collaboration on ways to reduce objections if that
is needed to get a release out the door.

> what do people think are the major issues that are stopping people talking about stuff
on list are?

The fact that people can vote on individual issues via jira,
which means that there is effectively no discussion of the
product as a whole on list.  I am constantly amazed at how
quiet it is in this project, at least until I remember that
most of the work is done exclusively via jira, unlike any of
my other followed projects that use jira.  I'd suggest that
the right place to hold any discussion is on the dev list,
but I am not on that list because it receives way too many
automated notifications.  Maybe it would help discussion on
dev if notices were sent elsewhere and only discussions were
held on dev.

By all means, produce a tarball and let the entire PMC vote
on it as the next release.  My personal preference is to not
allow anything that deviates from the major.minor.patch release
numbering that most software projects follow, but I don't have
a vote here.

It is perfectly reasonable for Doug (or anyone else) to vote
on a release based on a lack of version history, adequate
description of the sweet meats, or anything else that others
might consider non-technical.  This is a release vote!
It does not require consensus.  It requires minimal review
(usually meaning three +1s) and a majority opinion of those
on the PMC who choose to review the proposed release and vote.

....Roy
Mime
View raw message