hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Arun C Murthy <...@hortonworks.com>
Subject Re: Heads Up - hadoop-2.0.3 release
Date Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:52:41 GMT
Happy new year folks!

I'm glad to see that we are down to the last couple of blockers I hope we can resolve in the
next 24-hrs or so.

Once done, I'll create a branch-2.0.3-alpha to unblock branch-2 for commits targeted towards
the next release, create the new fix-versions in jira and spin the RC.
Committers - after the branch is created, please use only the new fix-version (2.0.4) and
check with me before you commit to branch-2.0.3-alpha. Thanks.

As always, I'd appreciate help to resolve any unexpected surprises and also to help verify
the RC.

Hopefully we can start the new year with a great release, there are lots of goodies in 2.0.3-alpha.

thanks,
Arun

On Dec 18, 2012, at 9:00 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:

> As Sid responded I think we can move off alpha once we fix YARN-142/MAPREDUCE-4067. There
are other apis we should clean up, but none as egregious as those two.
> 
> Someone on my team is starting on it as we speak and I believe we can get it done sometime
in Jan... thus targetting 2.0.4 (as a beta?). By then we'll also have wider rollouts of YARN
and would have fixed some more issues we've seen at very high scale deployments at Y!. Sounds
like the right time to do a beta release to me.
> 
> Arun
> 
> On Dec 19, 2012, at 10:13 AM, Aaron T. Myers wrote:
> 
>> Hey Arun,
>> 
>> Awesome to see we're almost down to zero blockers. What are your thoughts
>> on removing the "alpha" label from the upcoming release? It seems to me
>> from the earlier discussion that most folks feel that we're at the point
>> where the interfaces are sufficiently stable to warrant it.
>> 
>> Aaron
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Arun C Murthy <acm@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Nearly there:
>>> http://s.apache.org/hadoop-2-blockers
>>> 
>>> YARN-217 should be easy, I'd also like to get in YARN-253.
>>> 
>>> Arun
>>> 
>>> On Dec 19, 2012, at 1:15 AM, Todd Lipcon wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Any news on how this is progressing? Some folks in this thread below
>>>> inquired about getting this release out around the New Year timeframe,
>>>> but it looks like YARN-117 subtasks have gone pretty quiet. We all
>>>> know how long lifecycle changes can take to get pushed through ;-)
>>>> 
>>>> -Todd
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Steve Loughran
>>>> <steve.loughran@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I want to make some changes to the lifecycle of a yarn service (in a
>>>>> backwards compatible way).
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-117
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>  1. formal state machine model with stop state idempotent and
>>> entry-able
>>>>>  from any state
>>>>>  2. waiting/blocked state a service can enter when waiting for
>>> something
>>>>>  else
>>>>>  3. an alternate base class that does the state model checks before
>>>>>  executing any state change functions -currently its done at
>>>>>  end-of-operation in the super() calls.
>>>>>  4. gradual move of services to the stricter base class.
>>>>> 
>>>>> With a new base class nothing will break (as the move can be done
>>>>> case-by-case, leaving the heavily subclassed ones alone); the state
>>> model
>>>>> extensions & formalisation would be visible but not used.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I don't want to hold anything up, because I need more testing of things
>>>>> before this is ready for review. I just want to get the fixes in before
>>> it
>>>>> ships
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 19 November 2012 16:22, Robert Evans <evans@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I am OK with removing the alpha assuming that we think that the APIs
>>> are
>>>>>> stable enough that we are willing to truly start maintaining backwards
>>>>>> compatibility on them within 2.X. From what I have seen I think that
>>> they
>>>>>> are fairly stable and I think there is enough adoption by other
>>> projects
>>>>>> right now that breaking backwards compatibility would be problematic.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --Bobby Evans
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 11/16/12 11:34 PM, "Stack" <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Aaron T. Myers <atm@cloudera.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Arun,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Given that the 2.0.3 release is intended to reflect the growing
>>>>>>>> stability
>>>>>>>> of YARN, and the QJM work will be included in 2.0.3 which
provides a
>>>>>>>> complete HDFS HA solution, I think it's time we consider
removing the
>>>>>>>> "-alpha" label from the release version. My preference would
be to
>>>>>>>> remove
>>>>>>>> the label entirely, but we could also perhaps call it "-beta"
or
>>>>>>>> something.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I think it fine after two minor releases undoing the '-alpha'
suffix.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> If folks insist we next go to '-beta', I'd hope we'd travel all
>>>>>>> remaining 22 letters of the greek alphabet before we 2.0.x.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Todd Lipcon
>>>> Software Engineer, Cloudera
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Arun C. Murthy
>>> Hortonworks Inc.
>>> http://hortonworks.com/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
> 
> --
> Arun C. Murthy
> Hortonworks Inc.
> http://hortonworks.com/
> 
> 

--
Arun C. Murthy
Hortonworks Inc.
http://hortonworks.com/



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