Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@hbase.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CADcMMgE6wqvf_AhK5Vv-wWZFUJHiQaUX=MC8pyARuwA0MW+haw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CADcMMgGtw3Dr3OYNGpKENOmp3oZW+Y6BAYf9TN2+4d6FrwhWqA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADcMMgHwQD-fYXWL9vJUT23HAC9a6HjnpauHoVbD+Qygfr+KMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+4kjVvj-KV9aRpGEeiLU+eSWb=mXBQWwUY3NaT0ref-GC46ig@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADcMMgH86E8njX+kB_rad61Btf7d3LzZ-kZ5NxKUW=_fXJ4vvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+4kjVswa6RXhNXYwCFS8An8gYeatb9eaF5WtCU+j5Xhp13OLA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADcMMgEP8c6aYvu9iOMimiXQO1uxZU660_Q1qw8sPq0oNqfRcw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMUu0w80FR3Q9iiFR7ixCQ+tMP+G0-bNzk1hcmfS7k_FPvx+sA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMUu0w_EojOyKBCgmzN9pcxhi3hygXQ5kc7HztcSpxa0=K6ejQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADcMMgF_QZ+xMx7x=w2sEaG99UAw+01dH1yV4hey5aEnWcS67w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHXxaiAr6W36s7QG00xuCWuo9cKawZANRP4HXbp2JXX_P3CJzA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOmV22sraTcs-UhVcag=Ff2HKJ3GvT1y_=7k74azXscu7Qh4bA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPzbcGSJJPAOmwP1XwTzLMhxvdiN4QAh9dhPdr2dEC4-DuN0aw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALvzVW2ZOEMKPKTmk5-nK6jWbrJGcs0vt9uHOHfHt7UbDu8uFA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPzbcGQt8L5KPVppqdv6CjTA5OWphy7oFVGREEAX7CeQfnj+dQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALvzVW0D=iSXR5SjLiFC7OwWxWP0AANUjRpUCfoq0s8h=h2Evw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMUu0w88=KL=fgwrSbRPqynBdooP3xmEAiYk42F69ac6_4KqVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADcMMgEsgiDcuDkTuOL82XG5eRmv_Tf1QEdJb2Qw4ZdK6qMXzw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMUu0w_bn4MoRj6-Kvd=j==CLmsLWN_EMW+Np2oBVmHsM3N7ew@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADcMMgE6wqvf_AhK5Vv-wWZFUJHiQaUX=MC8pyARuwA0MW+haw@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Enis_S=C3=B6ztutar?= <enis@apache.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 19:14:52 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAMUu0w9kT0tPTJh7DrVCR44eL69HDFMCkBdj0Hk0wSBimUOmDw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: HEADSUP: Working on new 0.96.0RC
To: Stack <stack@duboce.net>
Cc: HBase Dev List <dev@hbase.apache.org>, Elliott Clark <eclark@apache.org>,
	=?UTF-8?Q?Enis_S=C3=B6ztutar?= <enis@apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2c8a25f6d9d04e8599211

--001a11c2c8a25f6d9d04e8599211
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> Anyways, if you fellas can't wait anymore, just say and we'll figure out
something.
As I see it, HBASE-9563 is committed, and HBASE-9696 is not a blocker
against 0.96. But if you argue that 9696 is indeed a blocker, let's raise
it as such. There is no point in creating an RC, an immediately sinking it
if we cannot verify the RC for a +1. We don't run into data loss issues
anymore which is why I still think we can release 0.96 even without 9696
and 9724. Nothing is preventing us to release 0.96.1, with this and more
fixes in let's say a couple of weeks or months.

I guess let's wait for tomorrow to see whether there is any progress on
9563 and 9696.

Enis


On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Enis S=C3=B6ztutar <enis@apache.org> wrot=
e:
>
>>  HBASE-9563 is trivial enough and it is already in 0.96. We may have run
>> that into some point, but not lately. Do you see your tests succeeding
>> with
>> HBASE-9563 and HBASE-9696?
>>
>>
> Both are under test in independent rigs.  For HBASE-9563, we are trying t=
o
> repro the clash of the masters to see if the patch helped.  We've also
> instrumented the rig so we can get more data when we hit the hang again.
>
> Anyways, if you fellas can't wait anymore, just say and we'll figure out
> something.
>

--001a11c2c8a25f6d9d04e8599211--