Mailing-List: contact general-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@hadoop.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+01ahiV0HiYjU1vpz8ZND-Q3A=S5k8OwicdjGw5x+Jg_j_jFQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAKtuutGywd26vcy8TJFQhcT3a1E_FQqiqY0vmdFyq2CH-xy+WQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <D2D44908-B9E1-4337-8D06-08F086FDEE77@apache.org>
 <CAB7mwtFfFQMTqG7_+LqbWGKHuhdv+au-6eeBcWVqqrQ14jypag@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+01ahiV0HiYjU1vpz8ZND-Q3A=S5k8OwicdjGw5x+Jg_j_jFQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 12:13:16 +0800
Message-ID: 
 <CA+RK=_D89vcjkoLBQRMEXZ7giiNWkK7KEoXzGZraC6nqPNViFg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release plan for Hadoop 2.0.5
To: "general@hadoop.apache.org" <general@hadoop.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bd6a8ce48e73104dc556544

--047d7bd6a8ce48e73104dc556544
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Making 2.0.x stable is really important for adoption of it as the new
production quality Hadoop.

I think Hadoop should adopt the merge window concept. After a release, a
new branch is opened for development. There is a window of time when
changes can go in, then the window is closed, then the branch is
stabilized, then the next major release is made off of the stabilized
branch. Repeat. What constitutes a major release numbering transition could
be from e.g. 2.x to 3.x, or from e.g. 2.0.x to 2.1.x. Either would work. If
feature development misses a window, it waits for the next. That is
completely fair and predictable. If the periodicity of open merge windows
is also predictable that is even better. If Hadoop can consider the merge
window now closed for 2.0.x, that would be great, it has been open for a
very long time.

+1 (nonbinding) after all of that, apologies for the verbiage but the
stability of the Hadoop ecosystem's foundation is a very important topic.
If I had a binding vote I would have voted +0 so as not to be presumptuous,
since my vote is nonbinding please consider it user feedback. Every single
project downstream is affected. We don't have a binding stake in the voting
but please consider us in your deliberations.

IMHO, a 2.1.0 branch and short merge window for getting HDFS snapshots out
there should quickly follow, and then the necessary 3-6 months of scale
testing. By all accounts talking with users it is the remaining compelling
feature missing from Hadoop 2.


On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 10:58 AM, lohit <lohit.vijayarenu@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
> Particularly making 2.0.X stable will help wider adoption sooner.
>
>
> 2013/5/9 J. Rottinghuis <jrottinghuis@gmail.com>
>
> > +1 (non-binding) to stabilize 2.0, and add new features only after a
> stable
> > release.
> > I understand that what constitutes as "new feature" versus "stabilizing"
> is
> > subjective.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Joep
> >
> > On May 1, 2013, at 12:53 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
> > >
> > > > Please vote on the following plan for Hadoop release 2.0.5
> > > > - bug fixes encountered in current release 2.0.4-alpha
> > > > - make all API changes to allow freezing them post 2.0.5
> > > > - no new features
> > > >
> > > > As discussed on @dev thread
> > > > http://s.apache.org/fs
> > > > this will allow to stabilize 2.0 branch in a short and predictable
> > period
> > > > of time.
> > > > This enables a powerful option to have the release tested at Yahoo
> > scale.
> > > > The plan is to follow up with 2.1.0 - the stable release.
> > > > New features can and should be added on top of the stable release
> once
> > it
> > > > is out.
> > > >
> > > > Hadoop by-laws:
> > > > http://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html
> > > >
> > > > "Release Plan
> > > > Defines the timetable and actions for a release. The plan also
> > nominates
> > > a
> > > > Release Manager.
> > > > Lazy majority of active committers"
> > > >
> > > > assume nomination of a Release Manager with the plan.
> > > > It would be really good if Arun continues if this plan is adopted.
> > > > We can return to the RM topic if not.
> > > >
> > > > The vote will run for 7 days until next Wed, May 8th.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > --Konstantin
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Have a Nice Day!
> Lohit
>


-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

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

--047d7bd6a8ce48e73104dc556544--