hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jonathan Hsieh <...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: Backporting to active branches
Date Fri, 12 Feb 2016 06:26:44 GMT
Users also deserve to get as few new surprises as possible.  Being on the
supporting side of this, I've come to prefer preserving minor known issues
to having new unknown issues caused of small improvements.

I prefer the conservative approach with "improvements", and prefer that
maint/point release just backport critical fixes, security fixes, testing
improvements (test only flakey fixups), recovery tooling (hbck updates),
and critical perf regression fixes.

If not getting minors out fast enough is the main concern and motivator,
I'd argue backporting more doesn't help the problem -- that is energy that
could be spent helping get more minors out more frequently.   One of the
things about having frequent point release like when we had with 0.94 was
that we likely could have shipped some of the earlier 1.2.0rcs and fixed
the criticals in next point release train.

Jon.

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@apache.org> wrote:

> I appreciate Elliot's voice for conservatism on released branches. However
> I don't think we're getting minor releases out the door fast enough,
> especially when we have nice "improvements" that apply cleanly. Users
> deserve to get as many of the improvements as are compatible for patch
> releases, according to our guidelines.
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Elliott Clark <eclark@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > That one's on the edge for me. It's trying to work around a bug somewhere
> > that has caused data loss in prod. So I would lean towards it being a bug
> > fix.
> >
> > However pulling from my last few filed jiras I would say these are all
> > improvements:
> > HBASE-15166
> > HBASE-15146
> > HBASE-15137
> > HBASE-15083
> >
> > Some of them fixed things that we hit in production but they didn't
> change
> > correctness or cause the system to be un-usable in the normal case. So I
> > would classify them as improvements. For me I would want to backport only
> > for patch releases fixes that fixed severe issues, things that changed
> > correctness or caused a system to be un-usable.
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Ok, in fairness there could be more debatable (or even not debatable)
> > > changes on branch-1 as you say. Also, a difference of perspective.
> Would
> > > you for example consider HBASE-15211 a bug fix or improvement?
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Elliott Clark <eclark@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The majority of changes in branch-1 that I see are bug fixes.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think that's the point that you and I differ. For me I would
> classify
> > > > most things on branch-1 as improvements and there are very few bug
> > fixes.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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