hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jesse Yates <jesse.k.ya...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Branching for 0.92 [WAS -> Re: [DISCUSSION] Accumulo, another BigTable clone, has shown up on Apache Incubator as a proposal]
Date Tue, 20 Sep 2011 03:53:08 GMT
You should be able to pretty easily set in in the pom (under properties),
and then just use in the <version> tag.

That way whenever you want to to bump version numbers, its one easy change.

-Jesse Yates

On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:

> I changed versions.  How would you make hbase.version work?  Looks
> like you can't set project.version.  I could change it to
> ${hbase.version} but then how to do the default value?
> St.Ack
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Rottinghuis, Joep
> <jrottinghuis@ebay.com> wrote:
> > Trunk should probably go to get a newer version as well (0.93?)
> > Can you make the version a property that I can override using
> -Dhbase.version=0.92-my-own-name?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Joep
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: saint.ack@gmail.com [mailto:saint.ack@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Stack
> > Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 8:23 PM
> > To: dev@hbase.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Branching for 0.92 [WAS -> Re: [DISCUSSION] Accumulo,
> another BigTable clone, has shown up on Apache Incubator as a proposal]
> >
> > That makes sense.  Let me make the change.
> > St.Ack
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 8:02 PM, Rottinghuis, Joep <
> jrottinghuis@ebay.com> wrote:
> >> Michael,
> >>
> >> Should the version in the pom on the 0.92 branch point to
> 0.92.0-SNAPSHOT?
> >> If so I can file a bug and supply patch for same.
> >> Or are you updating that only when you get ready for a release?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Joep
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Rottinghuis, Joep [mailto:jrottinghuis@ebay.com]
> >> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 6:02 PM
> >> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
> >> Subject: RE: Branching for 0.92 [WAS -> Re: [DISCUSSION] Accumulo,
> >> another BigTable clone, has shown up on Apache Incubator as a
> >> proposal]
> >>
> >> Thanks St.Ack!
> >>
> >> Joep
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: saint.ack@gmail.com [mailto:saint.ack@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> >> Stack
> >> Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2011 12:12 PM
> >> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Branching for 0.92 [WAS -> Re: [DISCUSSION] Accumulo,
> >> another BigTable clone, has shown up on Apache Incubator as a
> >> proposal]
> >>
> >> I was sort of waiting on a clean build to TRUNK before branching.  I
> think we should be there in next hour or so.  I'll branch this evening or by
> tomorrow morning.  That OK w/ you Joep?
> >>
> >> St.Ack
> >>
> >> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 8:42 PM, Rottinghuis, Joep <
> jrottinghuis@ebay.com> wrote:
> >>> Any update on the 0.92 branch getting cut?
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>> Joep
> >>> ________________________________________
> >>> From: saint.ack@gmail.com [saint.ack@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Stack
> >>> [stack@duboce.net]
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2011 8:42 PM
> >>> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
> >>> Subject: Branching for 0.92 [WAS -> Re: [DISCUSSION] Accumulo,
> >>> another BigTable clone, has shown up on Apache Incubator as a
> >>> proposal]
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to propose branching friday week, the 16th.  Hopefully that
> >>> will might get folks to focus on these last outstanding issues (of
> >>> which there are quite a few).
> >>>
> >>> Thereafter we need to work on stabilization which I'm sure will turn
> >>> up at least one bug, maybe two (smile).  Stabilization will run for a
> >>> good while I'd say and will take some effort all around.  Only bug
> >>> fixes should go into 0.92 branch (J-D might have to tie me to the
> >>> mast).
> >>>
> >>> Should we discuss in a separate whether to pull in security?
> >>>
> >>> St.Ack
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>> I also agreed at the time to hold off refactoring the build for Maven
> modules and supporting RPC engine variants. I would still have the same
> opinion if not for recent events.
> >>>>
> >>>> How much work remains for 0.92? If more than a few week's worth, then
> a parallel refactor of the build could happen, with a final merge step.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>>
> >>>>    - Andy
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue Sep 6th, 2011 12:02 PM PDT Gary Helmling wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Seems like committing it will disrupt the build and src tree
layout.
> >>>>>> Gary was holding off till we branched but 0.92 branching is
taking
> >>>>>> too long.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> + Lets branch this friday, or next?
> >>>>>> + And or, run a vote on whether we should commit security now
> >>>>>> + before
> >>>>>> we branch or after
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>This is getting off topic for the current thread, so I'll open a
new
> >>>>>thread to take a vote on converting trunk back in to maven modules.
> >>>>>This is what would be necessary to integrate the various security
> bits.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>The last discussion we had on this was on the dev list at the end
of
> >>>>>May/beginning of June:
> >>>>>http://search-hadoop.com/m/iXZmd2aZwBE1
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I agreed as much as anyone that we should hold off until after
> >>>>>branching
> >>>>>0.92 in order to avoid the disruption of moving the entire source
> >>>>>tree around.  So I have been holding off on this on my own
> >>>>>discretion and any delay sits mostly with me.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Of course, that was three months ago and we still haven't branched.
> >>>>>In hindsight, if we were aware how long the 0.92 process would go
> >>>>>on, I think the thread might have reached a different conclusion.
> >>>>>In any case, I think it warrants another discussion.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>--gh
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message