hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: HBase 0.92 branch
Date Fri, 29 Jul 2011 00:18:14 GMT
I was talking about feature branches. So, no, I do not support making a feature branch at this
time. What feature would that be?

Release branches and trunk should maintain the same convention we have right now: RTC with
one +1 from a committer not the originator of the patch, or CTR for changes marked as trivial.

 
Best regards,


- Andy


Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)


>________________________________
>From: Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com>
>To: dev@hbase.apache.org; Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
>Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 5:13 PM
>Subject: Re: HBase 0.92 branch
>
>>> Our practice is RTC with one +1 other than patch creator being sufficient
>for commit, and CTR for trivial changes. I'm -1 on changing this.
>Fair.
>
>Shall we branch when we have a successful TRUNK build after the three
>blockers on http://s.apache.org/x4, HFile V2 and HBASE-4027 get checked in ?
>
>Thanks
>
>On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>wrote:
>
>> > New issues outside the list have to collect 3 +1 from committers before
>> going in.
>>
>> -1
>>
>> Do we actually have bylaws?
>>
>> Our practice is RTC with one +1 other than patch creator being sufficient
>> for commit, and CTR for trivial changes. I'm -1 on changing this.
>>
>> Hadoop core recently ran a vote to increase the threshold for RTC to three
>> +1s for commits that represent a branch merge. I support this for HBase. So
>> if people think some big "new issue" needs additional review, then we make a
>> feature branch for it and require three +1s for merge commit.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>>    - Andy
>>
>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>> (via Tom White)
>>
>>
>> >________________________________
>> >From: Stack <stack@duboce.net>
>> >To: dev@hbase.apache.org
>> >Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 10:04 AM
>> >Subject: Re: HBase 0.92 branch
>> >
>> >On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Since build 2047, TRUNK build has been on a steady decline. I believe
>> even
>> >> if this trend is reversed, it is hard to guarantee that TRUNK build
>> would be
>> >> healthy in the future.
>> >
>> >I think we can fix it.
>> >
>> >> Now that the issues on http://s.apache.org/x4 have come down to 18, I
>> think
>> >> we should consider branching 0.92 soon (maybe after HFile v2 and
>> HBASE-4027
>> >> go in and we fix the broken build).
>> >
>> >I suppose I'd like the issues to go to zero before we branched but I
>> >can go along w/ the above; if we held to my way of doing things we
>> >might never branch.
>> >
>> >
>> >> After branching, we can focus on the following:
>> >> 1. every checkin to 0.92 branch shouldn't break its build. This requires
>> the
>> >> committer to perform at least one complete test suite run before
>> checking
>> >> in.
>> >
>> >I'll set up a build of the branch soon as we branch.  I've been
>> >responsible for build breakage of late.  Will reform myself.
>> >
>> >> 2. patches for issues on http://s.apache.org/x4 are allowed to go into
>> 0.92
>> >> branch. New issues outside the list have to collect 3 +1 from committers
>> >> before going in.
>> >>
>> >
>> >I'd say 3+1s if its a 'big' change.  The small stuff should just let go
>> through.
>> >
>> >Good stuff,
>> >St.Ack
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message