hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Drob <md...@apache.org>
Subject Re: DISCUSS: How can we have less branches?
Date Tue, 08 Aug 2017 16:14:56 GMT
> The discussion also brought up the notion of an LTS release line. I'm not
> sure how this jives with the more fequent minors, but would require some
> branch that's so stable that an RM can effectively spin releases blind.

Seems to me like this branch would necessarily need to be very
backport-light? Only the top of the highest priority issues would be
backportable to it, no?

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@apache.org> wrote:

> Last time we DISCUSSed EOL of 1.1 was back in November. At that time, a
> litany of issues were raised re: 1.2. Have those concerns been addressed?
> It seems to me that making this one the last release is too abrupt to folks
> tracking Apache. Would be better to give some notice.
>
> Had a nice hallway conversation a couple months back (at PhoenixCon, as it
> happens; they feel the pain as well) about our branch situation. I'll let
> the others chime in with more details, but the gist as I recall is that we
> should be doing more frequent minor releases with fewer patch releases.
> This pushes stabilization efforts closer to master and also imposes more
> strict stability requirements on big new features before they can be merged
> off the feature branch.
>
> The discussion also brought up the notion of an LTS release line. I'm not
> sure how this jives with the more fequent minors, but would require some
> branch that's so stable that an RM can effectively spin releases blind.
>
> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 12:14 AM Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> > (This came up during dev meeting in Shenzhen) We are running too many
> > branches and/or when applying patches, we do not do a good job
> backporting
> > to all active branches, especially fixes.
> >
> > We have master, branch-2, branch-1, branch-1.4, branch-1.3, branch-1.2,
> and
> > branch-1.1 active currently. If a dirty bug fix, the applier is
> backporting
> > to 7 branches. It takes a while applying to all especially if the
> backport
> > doesn't go in clean. I suppose the RM could monitor all upstream of them
> > and then pull wanted patches back (we could do that too) but seems like a
> > burden on an RMer.
> >
> > We should EOL a few?
> >
> > Nick is on branch-1.1 release at the moment. Perhaps this could be the
> last
> > off branch-1.1.
> >
> > 1.2 hosts our current stable release though 1.3 is out. How about we cut
> a
> > release off 1.3, call it stable, and then EOL 1.2 after another release
> or
> > so?
> >
> > What you all think?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > S
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message