Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 15322181EE for ; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 05:45:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 7111 invoked by uid 500); 12 Feb 2016 05:45:42 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 7021 invoked by uid 500); 12 Feb 2016 05:45:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@hbase.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 7009 invoked by uid 99); 12 Feb 2016 05:45:42 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 05:45:42 +0000 Received: from mail-wm0-f50.google.com (mail-wm0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id EBF811A0046 for ; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 05:45:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f50.google.com with SMTP id p63so5370093wmp.1 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 21:45:41 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YORZHr48dpDBAXhpRP3jgWlrpbORPdprdwiL1OHHc2Ea7+h2IK8fWf/Ec10csthDkVxAz/sahWLb21SRag== X-Received: by 10.194.111.199 with SMTP id ik7mr49485917wjb.25.1455255940483; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 21:45:40 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.60.215 with HTTP; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 21:45:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <56BCF228.5040800@gmail.com> <0E3A22B3-4F3B-442B-AA23-5BB2734B0F5D@gmail.com> From: Nick Dimiduk Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 21:45:20 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: Backporting to active branches To: hbase-dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1130d0ea63d1f4052b8c2d88 --001a1130d0ea63d1f4052b8c2d88 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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 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 > 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 > 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) > > > --001a1130d0ea63d1f4052b8c2d88--