hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Todd Lipcon <t...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: Update on 0.22
Date Thu, 02 Jun 2011 18:31:07 GMT
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Konstantin Shvachko
<shv.hadoop@gmail.com>wrote:

> I propose just to make them blockers before committing to attract attention
> of the release manager and get his approval. Imho, even small changes, like
> HDFS-1954 are blockers, because a vague UI message is bug and bugs are
> blockers.
>

Bugs are blockers? Then we'll never release!

Let's hear from Nigel what he thinks. It's his branch, if he's upset about
the way it's being handled, he can deal with it as he sees fit.

-Todd


> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Todd Lipcon <todd@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> > <shv.hadoop@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > > I can see them well.
> > > I think Suresh's point is that non-blockers are going into 0.22.
> > > Nigel, do you have full control over it?
> > >
> >
> > Of course it's up to Nigel to decide, but here's my personal opinion:
> >
> > One of the reasons we had a lot of divergence (read: external
> > branches/forks/whatever) off of 0.20 is that the commit rules on the
> branch
> > were held pretty strictly. So, if you wanted a non-critical bug fix or a
> > small improvement, the only option was to do such things on an external
> > fork. 0.20 was branched in December '08 and not released until mid April
> > '09. In 4 months a fair number of bug fixes and small improvements go in.
> > 0.22 has been around even longer. If we were to keep it to *only*
> blockers,
> > then again it would be a fairly useless release due to the number of
> > non-blocker bugs.
> >
> > Clearly there's a balance and a judgment call when moving things back to
> a
> > branch. But at this point I'd consider small improvements and pretty much
> > any bug fix to be reasonable, so long as it doesn't involve major
> reworking
> > of components. Nigel: if this assumption doesn't jive (ha ha, get it?)
> with
> > what you're thinking, please let me know :)
> >
> > -Todd
> >
> >
> > > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Eric Baldeschwieler <
> > eric14@yahoo-inc.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > makes sense to me, but it might be good to work to make these
> decisions
> > > > visible so folks can understand what is happening.
> > > >
> > > > On Jun 1, 2011, at 1:46 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Jun 1, 2011, at 1:27 PM, Suresh Srinivas wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> I see that there are several non blockers being promoted to 0.22
> > from
> > > > trunk.
> > > > >> From my understanding, any non blocker change to 0.22 should
be
> > > approved
> > > > by
> > > > >> vote. Is this correct?
> > > > >
> > > > > No, the Release Manager has full control over what goes into a
> > release.
> > > > The PMC votes on it once there is a release candidate.
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Owen
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Todd Lipcon
> > Software Engineer, Cloudera
> >
>



-- 
Todd Lipcon
Software Engineer, Cloudera

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