hadoop-mapreduce-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From <Milind.Bhandar...@emc.com>
Subject Re: [RESULT] - [VOTE] Rename hadoop branches post hadoop-1.x
Date Tue, 03 Apr 2012 22:24:21 GMT
Great !

Thanks @atm,

- milind

On 4/3/12 3:21 PM, "Aaron T. Myers" <atm@cloudera.com> wrote:

>If that's the case then there doesn't seem to be any question here. The
>feature is in trunk, and an implementation could be done for an older
>release branch that would be compatible with that branch. Sure, the code
>to
>implement the feature is quite different between the two branches, but
>trunk will remain a superset of the functionality of the past release, so
>no issue.
>
>--
>Aaron T. Myers
>Software Engineer, Cloudera
>
>
>
>On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:14 PM, <Milind.Bhandarkar@emc.com> wrote:
>
>> To my knowledge, shuffle is already pluggable in 0.23 onwards, as long
>>as
>> it is used only by mapreduce framework.
>>
>> That's why Avner says : "In parallel, I'll try to *learn what exists* in
>> 0.23". (Emphasize my own.)
>>
>> That's why I was wondering about the insistence of committing to trunk
>> first.
>>
>> - Milind
>>
>> ---
>> Milind Bhandarkar
>> Greenplum Labs, EMC
>> (Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author,
>>and
>> do not necessarily represent the views of any organization, past or
>> present, the author might be affiliated with.)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/3/12 2:44 PM, "Aaron T. Myers" <atm@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 2:37 PM, <Milind.Bhandarkar@emc.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> What would be guideline for a new feature, such as
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-4049, which maintains
>> >> compatibility for 1.x, but is not relevant to trunk, because the
>> >>codebases
>> >> have completely diverged, so cannot be committed to trunk ?
>> >>
>> >
>> >Are you sure this isn't relevant to trunk? The "target versions" field
>>of
>> >that JIRA lists both 1.0.x and 0.24.0 (trunk.) In the latest comment on
>> >that JIRA, the author appears to intend to do this work for both trunk
>>and
>> >1.0:
>> >
>> >"I want to have the described plugin-ability (desired with same
>>interface)
>> >for all future versions of Hadoop (as mentioned in the Target Version/s
>> >field). <snip> On the first phase, I am focusing on the existing 1.0
>> >branch
>> >as I know it. In parallel, I'll try to learn what exists in 0.23"
>> >
>> >--
>> >Aaron T. Myers
>> >Software Engineer, Cloudera
>>
>>


Mime
View raw message