hadoop-hdfs-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Trezzo <ctre...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: continuing releases on Apache Hadoop 2.6.x
Date Wed, 18 Nov 2015 16:20:52 GMT
Thanks Junping for the clarification! It was not my intention to violate
the rules. I would be happy to work with you and help you manage the
release in whatever way is most effective.

Chris

On Wednesday, November 18, 2015, Junping Du <jdu@hortonworks.com> wrote:

> Thanks Chris Trezzo for volunteer on helping 2.6.3 release. I think
> Sangjin was asking for a committer to serve as release manager for 2.6.3
> according to Apache rules:
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html.
> I would like to serve as that role to work closely with you and Sangjin on
> 2.6.3 release if no objects from others.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Junping
> ________________________________________
> From: Chris Trezzo <ctrezzo@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 1:13 AM
> To: yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org <javascript:;>
> Cc: common-dev@hadoop.apache.org <javascript:;>;
> hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org <javascript:;>; mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org
> <javascript:;>
> Subject: Re: continuing releases on Apache Hadoop 2.6.x
>
> Hi Sangjin,
>
> I would be happy to volunteer to work with you as a release manager for
> 2.6.3. Shooting for a time in early December seems reasonable to me. I also
> agree that if we miss that window, January would be the next best option.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Sangjin Lee <sjlee@apache.org
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>
> > I'd like to pick up this email discussion again. It is time that we
> started
> > thinking about the next release in the 2.6.x line. IMO we want to walk
> the
> > balance between maintaining a reasonable release cadence and getting a
> good
> > amount of high-quality fixes. The timeframe is a little tricky as the
> > holidays are approaching. If we have enough fixes accumulated in
> > branch-2.6, some time early December might be a good target for cutting
> the
> > first release candidate. Once we miss that window, I think we are looking
> > at next January. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.
> >
> > It'd be good if someone can volunteer for the release manager for 2.6.3.
> > I'd be happy to help out in any way I can. Thanks!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Sangjin
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Vinod Vavilapalli <
> > vinodkv@hortonworks.com <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Just to stress on the following, it is very important that any critical
> > > bug-fixes that we push into 2.8.0 or even trunk, we should consider
> them
> > > for 2.6.3 and 2.7.3 if it makes sense. This is the only way we can
> avoid
> > > extremely long release cycles like that of 2.6.1.
> > >
> > > Also, to clarify a little, use Target-version if you want a discussion
> of
> > > the backport, but if you do end up backporting patches after that, you
> > > should set the fix-version to be 2.6.1.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > +Vinod
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Nov 2, 2015, at 11:29 AM, Sangjin Lee <sjlee@apache.org
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > As you may have seen, 2.6.2 is out
> > > > <http://markmail.org/thread/yw53xgz6wzpqnclt>. I have also
> retargeted
> > > all
> > > > open issues that were targeted for 2.6.2 to 2.6.3.
> > > >
> > > > Continuing the discussion in the email thread here
> > > > <http://markmail.org/thread/ofjlzurok223bzyi>, I'd like us to
> maintain
> > > the
> > > > cadence of monthly point releases in the 2.6.x line. It would be
> great
> > if
> > > > we can have 2.6.3 released before the year-end holidays.
> > > >
> > > > If you have any bugfixes and improvements that are targeted for 2.7.x
> > (or
> > > > 2.8) that you think are applicable to 2.6.x, please *set the target
> > > version
> > > > to 2.6.3* and merge them to branch-2.6. Please use your judgment in
> > terms
> > > > of the applicability and quality of the changes so that we can ensure
> > > each
> > > > point release is consistently better quality than the previous one.
> > > Thanks
> > > > everyone!
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Sangjin
> > >
> > >
> >
>

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