hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: MOB in branch-1? (Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Merge branch hbase-11339 HBase MOB to trunk)
Date Wed, 20 Jan 2016 02:07:38 GMT
I wasn't clear in previous message.

MOB is a big feature. There is not enough time to get it into 1.2.0

I intended to vote for MOB getting merged into branch-1 (1.3.0)

Thanks


On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jon@cloudera.com> wrote:

> +1 to 1.2 being feature complete corrently.  There has already been a
> release candidate and folks are burning down the blockers currently to prep
> for the next RC.
>
> I like the idea of mob and sparkonhbase for 1.3.  I'm more comfortable with
> sparkonhbase -- it is a new module and thus not as invasive.
>
> Jon.
>
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Pretty sure Sean expressed 1.2 is feature complete and I'd support that.
> > Can we wait for 1.3 for MOB ? Can look at Spark connector then too.
> >
> > > On Jan 19, 2016, at 4:52 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Looks like 1.2.0 RC is in near future.
> > >
> > > I wonder if it is time to revive this thread (due to customer
> interest).
> > >
> > > As far as I can tell, the Mob related tests have been passing in the
> > recent
> > > past.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I haven't heard an user answer in the affirmative to wanting it.
> > >>
> > >> I'll volunteer to RM 1.3, whenever we need it. Premature to have that
> > >> discussion without 1.2 even out the door yet, though.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Stephen Jiang <
> syuanjiangdev@gmail.com
> > >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Actually, it is actively changing in master branch on MOB feature
> made
> > me
> > >>> think about: if we ever want to port MOB feature to branch-1, now is
> a
> > >> good
> > >>> time.  We can commit changes in both branches; otherwise, we probably
> > >> would
> > >>> miss some commits when we port MOB to branch-1 in a late time.
> > >>>
> > >>> I am more thinking about 1.3 release (certainly not 1.2), which we
> > still
> > >>> have some time to stabilize and allow interesting party to play with
> > the
> > >>> feature and give feedback.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks
> > >>> Stephen
> > >>>
> > >>> PS. given the features we discussed in 2.0.0 in the last community
> > >> meeting,
> > >>> I think it would not release earlier than 1.3 :-), unless we
> > >> intentionally
> > >>> not find a release manager for 1.3.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> It's practically November. Matteo, are you up for a thread on target
> > >>>> dates for 2.0.0 to start RCs?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Elliott Clark <eclark@apache.org>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>> I feel the same lets keep branch-1 stable, and work towards
a
> faster
> > >>>> 2.0.0.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net>
wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> IMO, MOB is still not settled in Master. It has a bunch
of flakey
> > >>> tests
> > >>>>>> that are getting fixed by Jingcheng or I've disabled them
till
> > >> someone
> > >>>> has
> > >>>>>> time to look at them. There is also a load of duplicated
code that
> > >> is
> > >>>> being
> > >>>>>> cleaned up (Matteo).
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Its not ready to go back to branch-1 IMO.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Are there users who'd like it backported?
> > >>>>>> St.Ack
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Stephen Jiang <
> > >>>> syuanjiangdev@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Hello, guys, the MOB is in master branch.  I saw bug
fixes
> > >> happening
> > >>>> in
> > >>>>>>> master branch.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I just wonder whether there is a plan to put MOB in
branch-1.  I
> > >> am
> > >>>>>> afraid
> > >>>>>>> if we don't do it now, it would be harder in the future
to back
> > >> port
> > >>>> if
> > >>>>>> we
> > >>>>>>> decide to do it in a late time.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Thanks
> > >>>>>>> Stephen
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > >>> apurtell@apache.org>
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Thanks Jon.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> When I'm back in the office I'll check out master
and have a
> > >> look
> > >>>> into
> > >>>>>>> any
> > >>>>>>>> locally repeatable test failures. Anyway in my
opinion at this
> > >>>> point it
> > >>>>>>>> would make the most sense for us to keep the MOB
changes in on
> > >>>> master
> > >>>>>> and
> > >>>>>>>> deal with any fallout in follow on issues. I think
all who voted
> > >>> +1
> > >>>> for
> > >>>>>>>> this change were aware that large changes like
this can have a
> > >>>>>>> temporarily
> > >>>>>>>> destabilizing effect. As long as the MOB devs are
around to help
> > >>>> clean
> > >>>>>>> up,
> > >>>>>>>> we should be good!
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Jonathan Hsieh
<
> > >> jon@cloudera.com
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> I had two clean full builds/unit test on my
internal setup and
> > >>> the
> > >>>>>>> latest
> > >>>>>>>>> build went back to ~4325 total tests and failures
on Procedure
> > >>>> relate
> > >>>>>>>> tests
> > >>>>>>>>> cases.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> I don't think mob is responsible for these
failures.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Jon.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Jonathan Hsieh
<
> > >>> jon@cloudera.com
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Although the the precommit buiid passed,
and the compilation
> > >>> and
> > >>>>>> mob
> > >>>>>>>>>> testing I ran after before the merge was
commited passed, It
> > >>>> looks
> > >>>>>>> like
> > >>>>>>>>>> the first full build after the merge [1]
failed.  It looked
> > >>> like
> > >>>>>>>>>> something hung along the way, and that
most of the previous
> > >>>> builds
> > >>>>>>> had
> > >>>>>>>>>> failed for various reasons. :(
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> I kicked it off again have it do another
try.  If it is mob
> > >>>> related
> > >>>>>>>> we'll
> > >>>>>>>>>> take hunt it down and take care of it.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Jon.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> [1] https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-TRUNK/6672/
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Jonathan
Hsieh <
> > >>>> jon@cloudera.com>
> > >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> I've merged the code in to master.
 Thanks for all the hard
> > >>>> work
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Jingcheng and thanks to all who have
been involved with
> > >>>> reviews,
> > >>>>>>>>>>> discussion, and voting!
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Jon
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 12:45 AM, Jingcheng
Du <
> > >>>>>>>> jingcheng.du@intel.com>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> The vote passes with 8 +1s and
no -1. Thanks all for
> > >>> guiding,
> > >>>>>>> helping
> > >>>>>>>>> and
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> voting!
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> We will work on the merge activities
and will let guys
> > >> know
> > >>>> about
> > >>>>>>> the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> detailed plan for merge time.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> And thanks Jon for helping merge
this branch to trunk!
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Jingcheng
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> View this message in context:
> > >>
> >
> http://apache-hbase.679495.n3.nabble.com/RESULT-VOTE-Merge-branch-hbase-11339-HBase-MOB-to-trunk-tp4073446.html
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from the HBase Developer mailing
list archive at
> > >>>> Nabble.com.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>>>>> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > >>>>>>>>>>> // HBase Tech Lead, Software Engineer,
Cloudera
> > >>>>>>>>>>> // jon@cloudera.com // @jmhsieh
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>>>> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > >>>>>>>>>> // HBase Tech Lead, Software Engineer,
Cloudera
> > >>>>>>>>>> // jon@cloudera.com // @jmhsieh
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>>> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > >>>>>>>>> // HBase Tech Lead, Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > >>>>>>>>> // jon@cloudera.com // @jmhsieh
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>> Best regards,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>   - Andy
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by
hitting back. -
> > >>> Piet
> > >>>>>> Hein
> > >>>>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Sean
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Best regards,
> > >>
> > >>   - Andy
> > >>
> > >> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> Hein
> > >> (via Tom White)
> > >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> // HBase Tech Lead, Software Engineer, Cloudera
> // jon@cloudera.com // @jmhsieh
>

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