hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Rough goal timelines for 1.1 and 2.0
Date Mon, 16 Mar 2015 17:42:11 GMT
And, now we have *two* volunteers for RM for 1.1. (Nick and myself). Let's
take that as interest in getting it done and do it.  As far as I'm
concerned, it's all yours Nick, have at it!


On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:30 AM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think we can learn a lesson or two from the vendor marketing machines --
> a release timed with HBaseCon would be ideal in this regard. My obligations
> to the event are minimal, so I'm willing to volunteer as RM for 1.1. Do we
> think we can make some of these decisions in time for spinning RC's in
> mid-April? That's just about a month away.
>
> -n
>
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Elliott Clark <eclark@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I'm most looking forward to rpc quotas and the buffer improvements that
> > stack has put in. So for me getting a 1.1 in May 1 would be cool.
> > That would allow us to talk about what was just released at HBaseCon, and
> > maybe even have 1.1.0 in production at places.
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > The only reason I can think of to make decisions now would be if we
> want
> > to
> > > ensure we have consensus for the changes for Phoenix and enough time to
> > > implement them.
> > >
> > > Given that AFAIK it's those changes that'll drive having a 1.1 release,
> > > seems prudent. But I haven't been tracking the changes lately.
> > >
> > > I think we're all in agreement that something needs to be done, and
> that
> > > HBase 1.1 and Phoenix 5 are the places to do it. Probably it won't be
> > > contentious to just decide as changes are ready?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sean
> > > On Mar 13, 2015 1:28 PM, "Andrew Purtell" <apurtell@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > That was my question.. We can discuss them independently? Or is
> there a
> > > > reason not to?
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Do we need to couple decisions for 1.1 and 2.0 in the same
> > > discussion?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > Like what? Interface changes for Phoenix maybe?
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Sean
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > >    - Andy
> > > >
> > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> > Hein
> > > > (via Tom White)
> > > >
> > >
> >
>



-- 
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