hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Naming of Hadoop releases
Date Tue, 20 Mar 2012 06:16:29 GMT
> This is a long standing issue with branch-0.22 - are either of you planning on fixing
this?

I personally do not have plans to fix security in .22. I don't think
we should target it. I hope 0.23 will be a replacement for it by
summer. Is it still in your roadmap, Arun?
I also don't think that this should be a requirement for renaming the
release, at least I haven't seen anything about it in the Apache
Hadoop policies.

> could you please share some roadmap/timelines?

I did discuss my roadmap with my managers. Sorry don't have anything to share.

Thanks,
--Konstantin

On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Arun C Murthy <acm@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> Konstantin and Milind,
>
>  As I've noted on the other thread (my bad):
>
>> However, the problem is that hadoop-0.22 has removed public and non-deprecated apis/features
(i.e. security) which are present in branch-1 (previously branch-0.20.2xx).
>>
>> This is against the Apache Hadoop release policy on major releases i.e. only features
deprecated for at least one release can be removed.
>
> This is a long standing issue with branch-0.22 - are either of you planning on fixing
this? If so, could you please share some roadmap/timelines?
>
> thanks,
> Arun
>
> On Mar 19, 2012, at 12:34 PM, <Milind.Bhandarkar@emc.com> <Milind.Bhandarkar@emc.com>
wrote:
>
>> I agree with Konstantin. In previous discussion, I had suggested
>> simultaneous renumbering, but for some reason it was not considered.
>>
>> (For history buffs: I upgraded from Windows 1.0 to Windows 3.1 straight.
>> Windows 2.0 did not have many features that made it compelling to upgrade.
>> It did not seem odd to skip a number then, and I don't see why it would
>> now. I also skipped Windows Vista and upgraded from XP to Windows 7, even
>> if Vista was touted as a major release.)
>>
>> - Milind
>>
>> ---
>> Milind Bhandarkar
>> Chief Architect, Greenplum Labs, Data Computing Division, EMC
>> +1-650-523-3858 (W)
>> +1-408-666-8483 (M)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/19/12 12:04 PM, "Konstantin Shvachko" <shv.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hadoop naming is definitely confusing. And having Hadoop-1 did not
>>> make it less confusing for users.
>>>
>>>> Current 0.22 -> Gets renamed to 1.5 (if it ever gets tested and
>>>> released)
>>>
>>> It was released on November 29, 2011.
>>> eBay is actively using it as of today.
>>>
>>> If the goal of renaming branches is to make things less confusing
>>> about Hadoop, then I agree with people saying we should do a
>>> simultaneous rename of the branches. That is
>>> Current 0.22 -> 2
>>> Current 0.23 -> 3
>>>
>>> It almost sounds like release .22 does not deserve a whole number,
>>> only a fraction. But having .22 renamed to 1.5 creates a confusion
>>> that it belongs to Hadoop-1 line, which is not exactly the message we
>>> want to send out.
>>> Also I don't know what the number of commits reflects, and whether it
>>> is good or not to have many for a particular release.
>>>
>>> If the community decides to rename .22 to 2 I will be glad to work on it.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> --Konstantin
>>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Todd Papaioannou
>>> <drluckyspin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mar 18, 2012, at 10:01 AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 9.22 can't be considered as 1.5 because it is the major release from
>>>>> 1.0 (old
>>>>> 0.20.x). Besides, by declaring it as 1.5 we'll be planting future
>>>>> confusion of
>>>>> the same sort that happened around 0.20* line.
>>>>>
>>>>> And last but not least, the same  discussion has happened in the past
>>>>> around
>>>>> 1.0 release time like http://is.gd/x1fVqu
>>>>
>>>> Yes I remember it well, but AFAIC there was no clear decision on 0.22
>>>> or 0.23. There were competing proposals and opinions and basically what
>>>> happened was that we punted the decision on anything other than
>>>> 0.20->1.0 until a later date. But, that later date is now approaching
>>>> and we continue to call the current release in question 0.23. Hence my
>>>> original email.
>>>>
>>>> Personally, I do not believe 0.22 is sufficiently major to call it 2.0
>>>> and push 0.23 to 3.0. But that's just my $0.02. I don't feel strongly
>>>> enough to worry about what the outcome is.
>>>>
>>>> What I _do_ care strongly about is that we get some resolution and stop
>>>> using 0.23 as a release name. It's confusing to the market and the
>>>> customer base, and while we have made great progress in simplifying
>>>> things with the 1.0 release moniker, we need to continue to make
>>>> progress.
>>>>
>>>> ToddP
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cos
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 10:41PM, Todd Papaioannou wrote:
>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With the upcoming release of 0.23, isn't it about time that we
>>>>>> started calling 0.23 "Hadoop 2.0" instead?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While the numbering system may make sense to everyone here, to the
>>>>>> rest of the world it's going to be hella confusing for 0.23 to come
>>>>>> out after Hadoop 1.0 was released. Since 0.23 has MR2 in it I think
>>>>>> that it would make sense to call it 2.0. Also, I think would really
>>>>>> help with the brand awareness/perception of the project in the wider
>>>>>> customer audience.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know there are some other potential releases out there too, so
my
>>>>>> overall suggestion would be:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Current 1.X -> Remains 1.x (as new bug fix releases are released)
>>>>>> Current 0.22 -> Gets renamed to 1.5 (if it ever gets tested and
>>>>>> released)
>>>>>> Current 0.23 -> Gets renamed to 2.0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Remember, a large part of the reason for renaming 0.20.xx to 1.0
was
>>>>>> to make project progress more understandable to the rest of the world.
>>>>>> We should ensure we don't regress with the next major release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ToddP
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Arun C. Murthy
> Hortonworks Inc.
> http://hortonworks.com/
>
>

Mime
View raw message