hama-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chia-Hung Lin <cli...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Skip minor release, and prepare 1.0
Date Sun, 18 Aug 2013 12:02:52 GMT
Sorry just want to double check what's the plan. Doesn't get point
about skip release until reaching version 1.0. Are we going to just
release some minor fixes and other (significant) patches will be
released after version 1.0? Or ...

For release procedure, probably we can borrow ideas from continuous
integration where IIRC software is released as earlier as possible,
and release cycle is reduced so that problems can be discovered and
fixed earlier. That seems to be suitable for our scenario.


On 18 August 2013 16:11, Edward J. Yoon <edwardyoon@apache.org> wrote:
> I mean, "put all TODO things into 1.0 roadmap, and just skip release
> until reach version 1.0".
>
>> people would compare MRv2, Giraph to Hama; and would think that MRv2,
>> and Giraph would be more better/ stable than Hama because of FT, etc.
>
> Spark also supports full fault-tolerance, and comparison has been
> already started.. Spark shows good performance, giraph shows good
> scalability. Hama has good performance and very flexible interface,
> but we are in gray zone.
>
>> +0
>
> I'm -0. I think we have to cut periodically.
>
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Chia-Hung Lin <clin4j@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> +0
>>
>> Personally I would not go for 1.0 now though the  release for 1.0 is
>> ok for me. My reason is people may expect functions such as FT to be
>> ready when it's in the version 1.0. Also it might be inevitably that
>> people would compare MRv2, Giraph to Hama; and would think that MRv2,
>> and Giraph would be more better/ stable than Hama because of FT, etc.
>> regardless of differences between projects.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 17 August 2013 16:33, Edward J. Yoon <edwardyoon@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I was planning to cut a 0.6.3 release candidate (Hadoop 2.0 compatible
>>> version), however it seems the age of compete for the preoccupancy is
>>> past. So we don't need to hurry up now. Moreover, we are currently
>>> adding a lot of changes, and still need to be improved a lot. We knows
>>> what we should do exactly.
>>>
>>> Do you think we can skip minor release and prepare 1.0 now?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>>> @eddieyoon
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> @eddieyoon

Mime
View raw message