hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Enis Söztutar <e...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Third release candidate for HBase 1.0.1 (RC2) is available. Please vote by April 24 2015
Date Mon, 27 Apr 2015 19:10:59 GMT
UT run for this RC is at
https://builds.apache.org/view/All/job/HBase-1.0.1RC2/4/. Previous runs had
some flaky failures.

Kind reminder that the RC vote has been extended until tonight since we did
not get enough votes. Please spend some time for the RC if you can.

Thanks.
Enis

On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 9:46 PM, Enis Söztutar <enis@apache.org> wrote:

> Here is my +1 for the RC.
>
> Checked sigs, crcs,
> Checked layout, jars
> Checked the book
> Run local mode
> Run on a 5 node cluster
> Run smoke test, simple shell commands
> Run LTT with 1M and different encodings / compression
> Run ITBLL, wrote 100M nodes
> Test with 1.0.0 and 0.98.12 clients
>
> Thanks Ted and Josh for testing the RC. We need one more +1. Anybody else
> wants to test? I'll extend the vote until tomorrow midnight PDT.
>
> Enis
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> +1 for resuming the vote.
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Enis Söztutar <enis@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Yes, consider voting resumed.
>> > Andrew, is +1 for the RC or for resuming voting?
>> >
>> > Let me extend the VOTE until Sunday 11:59PM PDT for lost time.
>> >
>> > Enis
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > +1
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Can this VOTE thread come back to life now?
>> > > > St.Ack
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Enis Söztutar <enis.soz@gmail.com
>> >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>> > apurtell@apache.org>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > ​Let's postpone this vote.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Agreed.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > See the threads on dev@ titled "​Clarifying interface
evolution
>> > > > freedom
>> > > > > in
>> > > > > > patch releases" and "The Renumbering (proposed)".
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Sean Busbey <
>> busbey@cloudera.com>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Apr 22, 2015 4:40 PM, "Enis Söztutar" <enis.soz@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I think the agreement is to continue with the
RC.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > One note... in the japi report, I was a little
surprised
>> > when I
>> > > > > > noticed
>> > > > > > > > method additions to InterfaceAudience.Public annotated
>> classes.
>> > > > This
>> > > > > > > means
>> > > > > > > > that a user could write code against 1.0.1 that
would not
>> work
>> > > > > against
>> > > > > > > > 1.0.0 which seems undesirable for a bugfix release.
I read
>> over
>> > > the
>> > > > > > book
>> > > > > > > > section on compatibility and didn't see this addressed,
so I
>> > > > thought
>> > > > > > I'd
>> > > > > > > > ask.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I think this is allowed. Did not check it though.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Enis
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > It's not allowed normally under semver. There's already
>> another
>> > > > thread
>> > > > > > > going on this though.
>> > > > > > >
>> >
>>
>
>

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