hadoop-yarn-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Varun Vasudev <vvasu...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.2 RC1
Date Mon, 28 Dec 2015 06:44:41 GMT
+1 on cherry-picking the fixes into 2.7.2.

-Varun




On 12/25/15, 9:08 AM, "Akira AJISAKA" <ajisakaa@oss.nttdata.co.jp> wrote:

>Thanks Vinod for starting the discussion.
>I'm +1 for cherry-picking these issues to 2.7.2.
>
>As Andrew said, when users upgrade Hadoop from 2.6.3 to 2.7.2,
>they can hit the issues.
>I'm thinking we should reduce the regressions as possible.
>
>Regards,
>Akira
>
>On 12/25/15 01:56, Andrew Wang wrote:
>> My 2c is that we should have monotonicity in releases. That way no
>> "upgrade" is a regression.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 10:00 PM, Tsuyoshi Ozawa <ozawa@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Vinod,
>>>
>>> thank you for the clarification.
>>>
>>>>   - Pull these 16 tickets into 2.7.2 and roll a new RC
>>>>> What do people think? Do folks expect “any fix in 2.6.3 to be there
in
>>> all releases that get out after 2.6.3 release date (December 16th)”?
>>>
>>> I personally prefer to pull these tickets into 2.7.2 since it's
>>> intuitive for me. I can help to cherrypick these tickets into 2.7.2
>>> once we decide to do so.
>>>
>>> This conflicts happened since the the timings of cutting branches and
>>> actual release are crossed. We can face these situations usually in
>>> the future since we have 2 or more branches for stable releases.
>>> Hence, it's a good time to decide basic policy now.
>>>
>>> BTW, should we start to discuss on new thread or continue to discuss here?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> - Tsuyoshi
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli
>>> <vinodkv@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> I retract my -1. I think we will need to discuss this a bit more.
>>>>
>>>> Beyond those two tickets, there are a bunch more (totaling to 16) that
>>> are in 2.6.3 but *not* in 2.7.2. See this:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=key%20in%20%28HADOOP-12526%2CHADOOP-12413%2CHADOOP-11267%2CHADOOP-10668%2CHADOOP-10134%2CYARN-4434%2CYARN-4365%2CYARN-4348%2CYARN-4344%2CYARN-4326%2CYARN-4241%2CYARN-2859%2CMAPREDUCE-6549%2CMAPREDUCE-6540%2CMAPREDUCE-6377%2CMAPREDUCE-5883%2CHDFS-9431%2CHDFS-9289%2CHDFS-8615%29%20and%20fixVersion%20!%3D%202.7.0
>>> <
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=key%20in%20(HADOOP-12526,HADOOP-12413,HADOOP-11267,HADOOP-10668,HADOOP-10134,YARN-4434,YARN-4365,YARN-4348,YARN-4344,YARN-4326,YARN-4241,YARN-2859,MAPREDUCE-6549,MAPREDUCE-6540,MAPREDUCE-6377,MAPREDUCE-5883,HDFS-9431,HDFS-9289,HDFS-8615)%20and%20fixVersion%20!=%202.7.0
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Two options here, depending on the importance of ‘causality' between
>>> 2.6.x and 2.7.x lines.
>>>>   - Ship 2.7.2 as we voted on here
>>>>   - Pull these 16 tickets into 2.7.2 and roll a new RC
>>>>
>>>> What do people think? Do folks expect “any fix in 2.6.3 to be there in
>>> all releases that get out after 2.6.3 release date (December 16th)”?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> +Vinod
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 23, 2015, at 12:37 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli <
>>> vinodkv@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Sigh. Missed this.
>>>>>
>>>>> To retain causality ("any fix in 2.6.3 will be there in all releases
>>> that got out after 2.6.3”), I’ll get these patches in.
>>>>>
>>>>> Reverting my +1, and casting -1 for the RC myself.
>>>>>
>>>>> Will spin a new RC, this voting thread is marked dead.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> +Vinod
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Dec 22, 2015, at 8:24 AM, Junping Du <jdu@hortonworks.com <mailto:
>>> jdu@hortonworks.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, when I look at our commit log and CHANGES.txt, I found
>>> something we are missing:
>>>>>> 1. HDFS-9470 and YARN-4424 are missing from the 2.7.2 branch and
RC1
>>> tag.
>>>>>> 2. HADOOP-5323, HDFS-8767 are missing in CHANGE.txt
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>


Mime
View raw message