hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org>
Subject Re: 0.98 patch acceptance criteria discussion
Date Fri, 17 Jul 2015 13:47:49 GMT
Thanks Andy.
I think the gist of the discussion boils down to this:We generally have two goals: (1) follow
semver from 1.0.0 onward and (2) avoid losing features/improvements when upgrading from an
older version to a newer one.
Turns out these two are conflicting unless we follow certain additional policies.
The issue at hand was a performance improvement that we added to 0.98, 1.3.0, and 2.0.0, but
not 1.0.x, 1.1.x, and 1.2.x (x >= 1 in all cases)So when somebody would upgrade from 0.98
to (say) 1.1.7 (if/when that's out) that improvement would "silently" be lost.
I think the extra statement we have to make is that only the latest minor version of the next
major branch is guaranteed have all the improvements of the previous major branch.Or phrased
in other words: Improvements that are not bug fixes will only go into the x.y.0 minor version,
but not (by default anyway, the RM should use good judgment) into any existing minor version
(and thus not in a patch version > 0)

If that's OK with everybody we can just state that and move on (and I'll shut up :) ).
-- Lars

      From: Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
 To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <dev@hbase.apache.org> 
 Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2015 8:58 AM
 Subject: 0.98 patch acceptance criteria discussion
   
Hi devs,

I'd like to call your attention to an interesting and important discussion
taking place on the tail of HBASE-12596. It starts from here:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12596?focusedCommentId=14628295&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14628295

-- 
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