hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Arun C Murthy <...@hortonworks.com>
Subject Re: Naming of Hadoop releases
Date Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:47:24 GMT
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
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message