Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@hbase.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of ryanobjc@gmail.com designates
 74.125.83.169 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=AgyYOFKFin0RfJ40Bd6m5znAd4vK3sA6Ecck46rxtPChXLfGlkZhE0O6rsmYJrgKeI
         aNPSB7IDzM/lIebzqYhrggvPQT22TTFGFSY5DSnU1nNWw728VMWhtszQ97sctJ24udFS
         SmnpWJZQdOA/FrZL0NkpO1BjU4/yHGJyCQC9U=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <190947.38545.qm@web65507.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <AANLkTilqVPQgpJ4l-_RMPwiafy4pnSkBNMdG6AjQnPY5@mail.gmail.com>
	<190947.38545.qm@web65507.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 13:07:42 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTim6TJiOCgD--iaevma5E9li5GEXLHxaztDRWeBU@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Shall we release hbase-0.20.5 Release Candidate 2 as
	hbase-0.20.5?
From: Ryan Rawson <ryanobjc@gmail.com>
To: dev@hbase.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Every release we ship has bugs, some known, most unknown.  I have
previously argued against perfectionism in our releases (perfect is
the enemy of good), since if a bug isn't so bad and is in a previous
release, then maybe we shouldn't hold up a release which has lots of
other important fixes.  The focus is on keeping forward momentum and
preventing regressions.  I think people might generally appreciate
more but smaller releases with fewer fixes (eg: 0.20.5 has about 18
fixes which seems pretty good, not too high not too low).


On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org> wrote=
:
> This is a slippery slope.
>
> --- On Tue, 6/8/10, Todd Lipcon <todd@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Todd Lipcon <todd@cloudera.com>
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Shall we release hbase-0.20.5 Release Candidate 2 as=
 =A0hbase-0.20.5?
>> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
>> Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2010, 7:26 PM
>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Ryan
>> Rawson <ryanobjc@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Should we ship 0.20.5 with the fixes as is?=A0 The
>> bug is very rare, and
>> > while some people might come across it, it is in
>> 0.20.4 which is known
>> > to be bad.
>> >
>> > We need to get a better 0.20 out there than
>> 0.20.4.=A0 What we have is
>> > pretty good, and we can fix the next issue in 0.20.6.
>> >
>> >
>> Actually that sounds fair to me. Ignore my -1 conditional
>> on us doing an
>> 0.20.6 sometime in the next couple weeks.
>>
>> I'll try to do some cluster testing this week to actually
>> put a +1 in
>> instead of just retracting a -1 :)
>>
>> -Todd
>>
>>
>> > -ryan
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Todd Lipcon <todd@cloudera.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > Unfortunately -1: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-2670af=
fects
>> > > branch as well.
>> > >
>> > > I'm working on a fix, will target both branch and
>> trunk, but may be a
>> > couple
>> > > days before we can thoroughly test it (this bug
>> is devious)
>> > >
>> > > -Todd
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I've posted an hbase 0.20.5 release candidate
>> 2 here:
>> > >>
>> > >>=A0 http://people.apache.org/~stack/hbase-0.20.5-candidate-2/
>> > >>
>> > >> Should we release this candidate as hbase
>> 0.20.5?
>> > >>
>> > >> It has 18 fixes: http://su.pr/1prW9y
>> > >>
>> > >> Please take it for a test spin if you have a
>> chance.=A0 Vote closes
>> > >> Friday, the 11th of June.
>> > >>
>> > >> Yours,
>> > >> Your HBase Homies
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Todd Lipcon
>> > > Software Engineer, Cloudera
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Todd Lipcon
>> Software Engineer, Cloudera
>>
>
>
>
>
>