Mailing-List: contact yarn-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Subject: Re: [Release thread] 2.6.5 release activities
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Junping Du <jdu@hortonworks.com>
To: Chris Trezzo <ctrezzo@gmail.com>
CC: "common-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <common-dev@hadoop.apache.org>,
	"hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org>,
	"mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org>,
	"yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org>, Jason Lowe
	<jlowe@yahoo-inc.com>
Thread-Topic: [Release thread] 2.6.5 release activities
Thread-Index: AQHR8p65odIp3D+jeEesn+l78eYEmaBCw9UA//+WW7mAAMIBgIAAl3YB
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 12:59:15 +0000
Message-ID: <1470920528790.43548@hortonworks.com>
References: <CAPz5eN7uUTAxNOUimao+hzx0hjwzVfZZz=vQE4PCVjimu8SSVQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <613605965.12351946.1470842058395.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1470847185717.28914@hortonworks.com>,<CAPz5eN6JVis5tKkVoPv1n=Low64AYOnMBU6w35tn31qDZWW6YA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPz5eN6JVis5tKkVoPv1n=Low64AYOnMBU6w35tn31qDZWW6YA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="_000_147092052879043548hortonworkscom_"
archived-at: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 12:59:24 -0000

--_000_147092052879043548hortonworkscom_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Chris,

      Thanks for your response!

      I think I could miss the thread discussion of "[DISCUSS] 2.6.x line r=
eleases" for something reason. I checked the discussion - Sean claimed that=
 HBase community needs 2.6.5, Zhe said they are using 2.6.x releases and Ak=
ira said that are over new 50 commits land on branch-2.6 since 2.6.4. Do I =
miss any comments there?

      These comments are more like wishes but not giving more clarification=
s on the needs. I would like to hear more specific reasons to not move to 2=
.7.x releases but prefer to upgrade to 2.6.5. If the only reason is about e=
xpectation management, I think we should claim 2.6.5 is the last branch-2.6=
 release after this release work, otherwise people would expect us to maint=
ain this branch forever which is impossible and unnecessary. Thoughts?


Thanks,


Junping


________________________________
From: Chris Trezzo <ctrezzo@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 9:30 PM
To: Junping Du
Cc: common-dev@hadoop.apache.org; hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org; mapreduce-dev=
@hadoop.apache.org; yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org; Jason Lowe
Subject: Re: [Release thread] 2.6.5 release activities

Thanks Jason and Junping for the comments! I will update the spreadsheet fo=
r HADOOP-13362 and YARN-4794.

As for continuing 2.6.x releases, please see the discussion in the "[DISCUS=
S] 2.6.x line releases" thread. Sean, Akira and Zhe all expressed interest =
in additional 2.6.x releases. I started this thread based off of that inter=
est. I understand there is a burden to maintaining a large number of branch=
es. I am not sure what the community's end-of-life policy is, but maybe we =
can issue a warning with the 2.6.5 release stating when we will stop mainta=
ining the release line. This at least gives users some time to make migrati=
on plans to a newer version.

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Junping Du <jdu@hortonworks.com<mailto:jdu=
@hortonworks.com>> wrote:
Thanks Chris for bring up this discussion.
Before we going to detail discussion of releasing 2.6.5, I have a quick que=
stion here: do we think it is necessary to continue to release branch-2.6, =
like 2.6.5, etc after 2.7 is out for more than 1 year. Any reason to not su=
ggest users to upgrade to 2.7.3 releases for latest fixes which is in relea=
sing now?
My major concern on more release efforts on legacy branches is the same wit=
h my comments on other release plan before - it seems too many releases tra=
ins get planned at the same time window (2.6.x, 2.7.x, 2.8, 3.0-alpha, 3.1-=
beta, etc.). Not only user could get confusing on this, but also I suspect =
we don't have so many bandwidth in community to push forward so these relea=
ses in high quality during the same time window - just like Chris Douglas m=
entioned in another email thread on committer activity and bandwidth. IMO, =
may be it is better to focus on limited number of releases and move them fa=
ster?

BTW, I agree with Jason that HADOOP-13362 is not needed for branch-2.6 unle=
ss we backport container metrics related patches there.


Thanks,

Junping
________________________________________
From: Jason Lowe <jlowe@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID>
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 4:14 PM
To: Chris Trezzo; common-dev@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:common-dev@hadoop.apa=
che.org>; hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org>; ma=
preduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org>; yarn=
-dev@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [Release thread] 2.6.5 release activities

Thanks for organizing this, Chris!
I don't believe HADOOP-13362 is needed since it's related to ContainerMetri=
cs.  ContainerMetrics weren't added until 2.7 by YARN-2984.
YARN-4794 looks applicable to 2.6.  The change drops right in except it has=
 JDK7-isms (multi-catch clause), so it needs a slight change.

Jason

      From: Chris Trezzo <ctrezzo@gmail.com<mailto:ctrezzo@gmail.com>>
 To: "common-dev@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:common-dev@hadoop.apache.org>" <c=
ommon-dev@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:common-dev@hadoop.apache.org>>; hdfs-dev=
@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org>; "mapreduce-dev@hadoo=
p.apache.org<mailto:mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org>" <mapreduce-dev@hadoop=
.apache.org<mailto:mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org>>; "yarn-dev@hadoop.apac=
he.org<mailto:yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org>" <yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org<mail=
to:yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org>>
 Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2016 7:32 PM
 Subject: [Release thread] 2.6.5 release activities

Based on the sentiment in the "[DISCUSS] 2.6.x line releases" thread, I
have moved forward with some of the initial effort in creating a 2.6.5
release. I am forking this thread so we have a dedicated 2.6.5 release
thread.

I have gone through the git logs and gathered a list of JIRAs that are in
branch-2.7 but are missing from branch-2.6. I limited the diff to issues
with a commit date after 1/26/2016. I did this because 2.6.4 was cut from
branch-2.6 around that date (http://markmail.org/message/xmy7ebs6l3643o5e)
and presumably issues that were committed to branch-2.7 before then were
already looked at as part of 2.6.4.

I have collected these issues in a spreadsheet and have given them an
initial triage on whether they are candidates for a backport to 2.6.5. The
spreadsheet is sorted by the status of the issues with the potential
backport candidates at the top. Here is a link to the spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lfG2CYQ7W4q3olWpOCo6EBAey1WYC8hTRUe=
mHvYPPzY/edit?usp=3Dsharing

As of now, I have identified 16 potential backport candidates. Please take
a look at the list and let me know if there are any that you think should
not be on the list, or ones that you think I have missed. This was just an
initial high-level triage, so there could definitely be issues that are
miss-labeled.

As a side note: we still need to look at the pre-commit build for 2.6 and
follow up with an addendum for HADOOP-12800.

Thanks everyone!
Chris Trezzo


--_000_147092052879043548hortonworkscom_--