hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Backporting to active branches
Date Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:27:36 GMT
We don't have frequent enough releases with 0.98?


> On Feb 11, 2016, at 10:26 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jon@cloudera.com> wrote:
> 
> 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
View raw message