hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release plan for Hadoop 2.0.5
Date Tue, 14 May 2013 05:35:20 GMT
I don't understand why this should become about whether a downstream
project follows upstream JIRA arcania. In fact some of us do, and even
participate occasionally in discussions here. The HBase community is
particularly active in this regard. Perhaps a brief survey of JIRA history
will confirm that to your satisfaction. I also find baseless the ad hominem
that somehow I am indulging in fantasy or .. I'm not exactly sure what. I
came here to respectfully perform exactly the participation you implore
from a downstream project point of view. It would be great if the further
evolution of 2.0.x could continue to stabilize without further major
internal changes. This does not ask that Hadoop stop developing features,
or to stop backporting to branch-2 (on a 2.1.x or ...)

On Monday, May 13, 2013, Chris Douglas wrote:

> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org<https://mail.google.com/mail/mu/mp/2/?source=nap&hr=1&hl=en>>
> wrote
> > It would seem to a humble outsider that project formalism and procedure
> is
> > not the issue, instead that is expectations and impact on the outside
> > world. We hear that branch-2 is approaching stability, except when it
> > isn't, as evidenced by new downstream project unit test failures at each
> > "minor" release, with major new features going in because it's too
> > difficult to renumber. (??)
> Respectfully, this is against software tagged so explicitly as
> "alpha", it's in the version number. Did you file JIRAs and
> participate in reviewing the protocols/APIs that changed? Did you
> raise your use cases with developers, so they know someone was coding
> against that behavior?
> The 2.x branch contains years of work from its contributors, who know
> how fortunate they are to have downstream projects eager to use them.
> But let's not indulge in the fantasy that all our frustrations with
> software development are due to others' negligence. If you follow JIRA
> traffic, the work on ensuring that branch-2 protocols remain stable
> has been the source of most compatibility issues between patch
> versions. And several recent discussions have covered how Bigtop can
> help Hadoop development know when it breaks downstream projects. -C

Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)

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