hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: DISCUSSION: 1.0.0
Date Thu, 02 Jan 2014 20:53:13 GMT
Yeah, I want to have an 0.98 RC in the test rig by week's end. So that
would be artifacts for voting available next week.

My suggestion is a 1.0 release 3 months or so from when 0.98.0 ships. This
is arbitrary, but seems reasonable to me as enough time to get some
production experience with 0.96 and/or 0.98, sort out the remaining API
issues for a 1.0 caliber release, and do whatever else needs doing
(tooling).

Having one RM for any given release will avoid split-brain issues. :-)


On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:52 AM, lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org> wrote:

> I'd be volunteering for RM.Maybe do it together?
> Personally I'd like to see some heavy production usage of 0.96 or 0.98 in
> the community before can call the new "DNA" (HBase >= 0.96) 1.0.
>
> -- Lars
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>  From: Stack <stack@duboce.net>
> To: HBase Dev List <dev@hbase.apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2014 11:26 AM
> Subject: DISCUSSION: 1.0.0
>
>
> Andrew is talking of the first 0.98RC being imminent.
>
> Time to start in on the release that will follow 0.98.x.  We seem to all be
> good with calling it 1.0.0.  Speak up if you think different. (I just added
> a 1.0.0 version to JIRA).
>
> + What should 1.0.0 have in it beyond what is in 0.98.
> + Why can't 1.0.0 just be 0.98.0, or 0.98.1 altogether?
> + When should it come out?  I'm thinking soon after 0.98. Feb/March?
> (Presuming 0.98 ships in Jan).
> + Who should RM it? (I could but perhaps others are interested).
>
> What else should we consider achieving the state of 1.0.0ness?
>
> Happy New Year all,
> St.Ack
>



-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

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

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