hadoop-hdfs-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Vinayakumar B <vinayakum...@apache.org>
Subject Re: A 2.7.1 release to follow up 2.7.0
Date Fri, 10 Apr 2015 04:44:41 GMT
Thanks Vinod.
+1 for the above plan of 2.7.1.
2.7.0 is in the queue for long time.

-Vinay

Regards,
Vinay

On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 3:31 AM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli <
vinodkv@hortonworks.com> wrote:

> Thanks everyone for your thoughts!
>
> branch-2.7 is now open for commits to a 2.7.1 release. JIRA also now has a
> 2.7.1 version for all the sub-projects.
>
> I moved all the pending non-blocker tickets from 2.7.0 into 2.8.0. Please
> move anything back into 2.7.1 as you see fit. As I mentioned before, let's
> restrict ourselves to important bug-fixes and blockers.
>
> We can target a maintenance release in 2-4 weeks depending on the inflow
> of the bug reports.
>
> Thanks,
> +Vinod
>
> On Apr 9, 2015, at 2:12 PM, Zhijie Shen <zshen@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>
> > I meant we *haven't* done the compatibility check.
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Zhijie Shen <zshen@hortonworks.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 2:00 PM
> > To: yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org; common-dev@hadoop.apache.org
> > Cc: hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org; mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org; Vinod
> Kumar Vavilapalli
> > Subject: Re: A 2.7.1 release to follow up 2.7.0
> >
> > +1 for roll out 2.7.0 soon and continuing stabilization in 2.7.1.
> >
> > Agree with Karthik, it's better to exclude all improvements unless it
> turns out to blocking something.
> >
> > In terms of jdiff, we have done the compatibility check for quite a
> while in branch-2. Do we want to back port it to (some of) early releases?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Zhijie
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Steve Loughran <stevel@hortonworks.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 12:56 PM
> > To: yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org
> > Cc: hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org; common-dev@hadoop.apache.org;
> mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org; Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli
> > Subject: Re: A 2.7.1 release to follow up 2.7.0
> >
> > There's a couple of S3a fixes coming along which could go into a 2.7.1;
> they've been held back to avoid rushing them in to 2.7.0 last-minute.
> >
> >> On 9 Apr 2015, at 20:33, Junping Du <jdu@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> +1 (non-binding).
> >> The plan sounds reasonable. We should make our release train more
> fast-moving, and predictable - it could benefit our community and ecosystem
> in many aspects.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Junping
> >> ________________________________________
> >> From: Arpit Agarwal <aagarwal@hortonworks.com>
> >> Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 8:23 PM
> >> To: hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org; common-dev@hadoop.apache.org;
> yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org; mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org
> >> Cc: Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli
> >> Subject: Re: A 2.7.1 release to follow up 2.7.0
> >>
> >> +1 for 2.7.1 and +1 for promoting it to 'stable', assuming it includes
> no new features or gratuitous improvements.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Arpit
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/9/15, 11:48 AM, "Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli" <vinodkv@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I feel like we haven't done a great job of maintaining the previous 2.x
> >>> releases. Seeing as how long 2.7.0 release has taken, I am sure we will
> >>> spend more time stabilizing it, fixing issues etc.
> >>>
> >>> I propose that we immediately follow up 2.7.0 with a 2.7.1 within 2-3
> >>> weeks. The focus obviously is to have blocker issues, bug-fixes and
> *no*
> >>> features. Improvements are going to be slightly hard to reason about,
> but I
> >>> propose limiting ourselves to very small improvements, if at all.
> >>>
> >>> The other area of concern with the previous releases had been
> >>> compatibility. With help from Li Lu, I got jdiff reinstated in branch-2
> >>> (though patches are not yet in), and did a pass. In the unavoidable
> event
> >>> that we find incompatibilities with 2.7.0, we can fix those in 2.7.1
> and
> >>> promote that to be the stable release.
> >>>
> >>> Thoughts?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,+Vinod
>
>

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