hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jonathan Hsieh <...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: Upcoming merge of snapshots branch into trunk. (HBASE-6055 and HABSE-7290)
Date Fri, 11 Jan 2013 13:33:33 GMT
Cloudera Hat:  We are customer driven when it comes to features and
this is oft requested.  0.96 is a compatiblity breaking release and we
have some constraints there. Snapshots is mostly an additive feature
so it is technically possible with minor compatibility concerns.

Apache Hat: Keeping features to new versions makes the most sense - it
keeps stable versions stable and encourages folks to move to newer
shinier versions. :).  Ideally, with a healthy Apache project that
releases regularly, the release schedule and feature set of
distributions shouldn't affect the natural release cadence and feature
set of the apache project.

At the moment the best guess for when 0.96 gets released is unknown.
There will be a non-trivial amount of time necessary to harden
snapshots as well as all the other additions to that version.  Its
pretty plain to see that Cloudera and HWX are putting significant
efforts into readying 0.96 as well.


On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:36 PM, lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org> wrote:
> Oh, I meant the 1.0.x, 1.1.x, 2.x.x, etc version. Yeah, the -beta is not a good idea
> I have to ask the Cloudera and Hortonworks folks then: Why not wait until 0.96 is stable?
Why backport snapshots to 0.94?
> -- Lars
> ________________________________
>  From: Stack <stack@duboce.net>
> To: HBase Dev List <dev@hbase.apache.org>; lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 9:19 PM
> Subject: Re: Upcoming merge of snapshots branch into trunk. (HBASE-6055 and HABSE-7290)
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:34 PM, lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org> wrote:
> Eventually we should switch to semantic versioning (like Hadoop).
> The -beta stuff?  Nah, at least in Hadoop, it has been arbitrarily applied (and contended).
 Lets not use Hadoop as an example.  We have some precedent for linux-y odd is unstable, even
is stable.  Lets hold to it I'd say.
> It also depends on the timing of 0.96.
>>The fact that two companies want to port this to 0.94 seems to indicate low confidence
that we can ship a stable 0.96 soon.
> I think it is more that 0.96.0 is a singularity.  Including 0.96 in a downstreamer's
bundle only makes sense when the vendor is moving to a new major version.  These major versions
happen on a less frequent cycle.   We just need to make sure 0.96 is out and well-baked the
next time these cycles come around.
> St.Ack

// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// Software Engineer, Cloudera
// jon@cloudera.com

View raw message