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 2F56418536 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 04:20:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 18235 invoked by uid 500); 8 Apr 2016 04:20:05 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 18133 invoked by uid 500); 8 Apr 2016 04:20:05 -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 18117 invoked by uid 99); 8 Apr 2016 04:20:05 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd4-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 04:20:05 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd4-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd4-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id A4640C0DAB for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 04:20:04 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd4-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.721 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd4-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cloudera-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd4-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eTx6bqY7UVHJ for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 04:20:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lf0-f53.google.com (mail-lf0-f53.google.com [209.85.215.53]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 238105F202 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 04:20:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf0-f53.google.com with SMTP id e190so69188194lfe.0 for ; Thu, 07 Apr 2016 21:20:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cloudera-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=5Szbp/Z9ijoXPtsU/4PVRC0KaoOdWa2Csfve7ftXn4g=; b=dPrmStSA1uTg8ar2/vHuVB6CqlySkbZ9dpOF0FGNGgkXkzrM0VjXtfCe4AJa81ewE+ XbG6UdxYONrSbn+czMielm0bjNrqPl8FBHd3Scx40auGiha94nLSoEjSozoD5ITm4bl3 0MTaOwSa8iZactEP8Vnu7v3bG1WS49OPLH+u7N76R2olDd8LighNyfWIpa7rZqjX8tMw +sCH5PDVXkxQcagvGiWDXYdLhjQfNZC0Uhp/IJcrfqXXe/ofIsYSrp/mTurVr9n2OIng 7BxbZkwmC3ZryHLavbESOoGXNhxjiScTEpkCZl/UH5CVpEYUu1oadqaUSUnCa1cbmLA7 4UuA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=5Szbp/Z9ijoXPtsU/4PVRC0KaoOdWa2Csfve7ftXn4g=; b=a6GP3AhKZTjG1vBD22beU1FdWiv94fmnIV0BmWO+YNSw7CGYskVF9HRjow3Vq3wZqa BmVEFo5Fm+DQ3UBhmsy8W65Z0wVbCGbijfZNaoqNk2qnFLwabD1+h76qby2HCUFCFujQ +BDXk88QFN3NnJnVlaCoR2OWKIBGtDlPDhVFJXAItGNsv5p6rf0bFWJaF98M6aLXXgEx QQlhWwwigsH7M1Lu1OjDtziDHCkyxenRlYo57lUp40lmtsoK9E0ee92utF3457xzOYu1 1C09DjYrH0mMidPmr9go6WdIc6NAAUSA0wbhZbB63eUSc3SvJpLDP/kpHHJIhgcNP5+/ BuAQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJLv0Hx18F2uist+sJrATVVIocDYDMSSWAkI+trt+w6eYgofsQlJ8xYbTW5rOQ/xIb7pqMLS3L2fzhNEaYHW X-Received: by 10.25.208.65 with SMTP id h62mr2771316lfg.2.1460089201470; Thu, 07 Apr 2016 21:20:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.25.76.132 with HTTP; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 21:19:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Sean Busbey Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 21:19:41 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Any objection to saying HBase 1.2.0 is not supported on versions < hadoop-2.4.x? To: dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +1 from me, I steer folks away from NT versions anyways on the assumption we'll accidentally break them at some point. On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 9:17 PM, Stack wrote: > Currently 1.2.x is marked as NT -- i.e. not tested -- on hadoop-2.3.x or > less. I am advocating we change the NT to X: i.e. NOT supported. > > You all good w/ that? > > St.Ack > P.S. Motivation is relatively minor, see HBASE-15550, but no harm in > letting go of old hadoops. -- busbey