hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Moving 2.0 forward
Date Sat, 14 Jan 2017 09:29:47 GMT
For 3.3, hbase-spark module, there is HBASE-16179 which enables support for Spark 2.0  
It needs some review. 

Cheers

> On Jan 13, 2017, at 11:25 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Stephen Jiang <syuanjiangdev@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Hello, Andrew, I was a helper on Matteo so that we can help each other
>> while we are focusing on the new Assignment Manager work.  Now he is not
>> available (at least in the next few months).  I have to be more focused on
>> the new AM work; plus other work in my company; it would be too much for me
>> to 2.0 RM alone.  I am happy someone would help to take primary 2.0 RM role
>> while I am still help to make this 2.0 release smooth.
> (I could help out Stephen. We could co-RM?)
> 
> 
>> For branch-2, I think it is too early to cut it, as we still have a lot of
>> moving parts and on-going project that needs to be part of 2.0.  For
>> example, the mentioned new AM (and other projects, such as HBASE-14414,
>> HBASE-15179, HBASE-14070, HBASE-14850, HBASE-16833, HBASE-15531, just name
>> a few).  Cutting branch now would add burden to complete those projects.
> Agree with Stephen. A bunch of stuff is half-baked so a '2.0.0' now would
> be all loose ends and it'd make for a messy narrative.
> 
> I started a doc listing state of 2.0.0:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit?usp=sharing
> 
> In the doc I made an estimate of what the community considers core 2.0.0
> items based in part off old lists and after survey of current state of
> JIRA. The doc is open for comment. Please chime in if I am off or if I am
> missing something that should be included. I also make a rough estimate on
> state of each core item.
> 
> I intend to keep up this macro-view doc as we progress on 2.0.0 with
> reflection where pertinent in JIRA . Suggest we branch only when code
> compete on the core set most of which are complete or near-so.
> End-of-February should be time enough (First 2.0.0 RC in at the start of
> May?).
> 
> Thanks,
> St.Ack
> 
> 
> 
>> thanks
>> Stephen
>> 
>> On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> I've heard a rumor the co-RM situation with 2.0 may have changed. Can we
>>> get an update from co-RMs Matteo and Steven on their availability and
>>> interest in continuing in this role?
>>> 
>>> To assist in moving 2.0 forward I intend to branch branch-2 from master
>>> next week. Unless there is an objection I will take this action under
>>> assumption of lazy consensus. Master branch will be renumbered to
>>> 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT. Once we have a branch-2 I will immediately begin scale
>>> tests and stabilization (via bug fixes or reverts of unfinished work) and
>>> invite interested collaborators to do the same.
>> 

Mime
View raw message