Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8867E200D39 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 2017 14:06:07 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 86DC8160C03; Sat, 11 Nov 2017 13:06:07 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id CCC6B160BF1 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 2017 14:06:06 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 87083 invoked by uid 500); 11 Nov 2017 13:06:05 -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 87070 invoked by uid 99); 11 Nov 2017 13:06:05 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 11 Nov 2017 13:06:05 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id B69F9191CC7 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 2017 13:06:04 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.629 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.629 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd3-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id weJGu8c8tImW for ; Sat, 11 Nov 2017 13:06:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oi0-f53.google.com (mail-oi0-f53.google.com [209.85.218.53]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 87B4260F0E for ; Sat, 11 Nov 2017 13:06:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oi0-f53.google.com with SMTP id s144so8025049oih.3 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 2017 05:06:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=3S+oHuSb7h64k9LuWfMUuHwggiWyIpTDJr9BTmRGOZY=; b=QQbbJPgv37dWVLX0G41NQ997H+oEA/sJlTR05EZw0dVmmw7d0L+qtUouvgH93j810/ oIUuMJ3hd6U5wKw6/yeHbTngCncrp1VX3Oo3pfZJOFfuLvFzzCiwLpQNghU1bUrSXj9V BQT4Uxex9WpJKsn1ZwHijRe/MjApoK6BCTOdH6btsKLBnox8FNDuVlxHWma5JOafaeUc COKiMF+KAFfK/O6M8aXicyEU8fFw/a35VOd/SbEqmeUSQ8jj+AhTg2IM2tEIB49X8gUr /GLVjmrEyhTcU6ZefLcaag+1eI7Vcn51s30fVq0QR5UxAnaZ0eS9Mq/2Pl5XqEnwcsao Ct3g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=3S+oHuSb7h64k9LuWfMUuHwggiWyIpTDJr9BTmRGOZY=; b=BrlHmng2+Zoigr1zLlMXkM9UIkxkxVkRhylSZa/DPSslUeGa2dPHWgJr8iZx/+U5UJ 41x9arBHTsRf8CV3Gdih3v9y2rSLDyD2bvyQtqx+nehro+8bltJh1HUPaKEe8LSPlt/X XAjp+eTNX37iWwDGS4HrtJ788Js3JPSuDOUPBnFCPwRq4sss6vBeDjj5NZSX9zEGP+6D crWq9ydBPGYNJie74OsHi+rFmQSSjwcv22qpoSBquP8Fuicu3/zHh1A9SaW4boHyxakS QSSqx/Of6pL5S8hm5KqJ7CYf0YYPmAt6jLfRyiqsNnMaPuGLXHNQsh2FAGw+bV7afw1D q20A== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4yzUMZlKJsYH6SFTPxI6lF5hr+LXP4kCGw7RAFZ8rPSVFB+Gc+ r15ZHScJ7BkXAXD1KeOl46wFd0tVYW/7XJF6sI1csg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMZDqd8oirCKK0Fzp/ajwj3IJPyffnScyV++A9Bmqn3Ur0VBMDYaCfQAeFSi+4lkMHYHE69mv0sQetjI3u6InrA= X-Received: by 10.202.79.75 with SMTP id d72mr2045658oib.376.1510405554963; Sat, 11 Nov 2017 05:05:54 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.202.212.77 with HTTP; Sat, 11 Nov 2017 05:05:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Yu Li Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2017 21:05:54 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Release 1.4.0 update To: dev@hbase.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113d83b2920982055db4b298" archived-at: Sat, 11 Nov 2017 13:06:07 -0000 --001a113d83b2920982055db4b298 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Great to know, really good progress! It seems we don't do performance comparison with current stable release when releasing the first RC of a new branch, but should we do to avoid issues like HBASE-14460 (write performance regression from 0.98 to 1.1)? This is a must-have for us to decide new version for product env here, and I wonder whether this applies for most users (please forgive my ignorance if there's any existing policy for this). Thanks. bq. Back when we first discussed branching for 1.4 Yu Li asked for this... Thanks for remembering this and keeping the promise boss (smile). Best Regards, Yu On 11 November 2017 at 03:30, Andrew Purtell wrote: > The march to 1.4.0 is progressing. > > I've run the unit test suite on a C4 class AWS instance 25 times and there > are no failures. This is ongoing. I'm aiming for 100 runs. > > Fix versions are now set up for constructing a reasonable change log. > > With HBASE-19232 applied a build with release audits enabled will pass. > > I backported error-prone support yesterday and will now look at checkstyle > and error-prone analyses for important issues. > > I'll probably do HBASE-19238 before 1.4.0 goes out so that neat utility > will be available. > > Back when we first discussed branching for 1.4 Yu Li asked for this: > > > One naive question here: from the book > > we will add > > functionality (in a backwards-compatible manner) in minor versions, but > it > > seems we don't have any one-line description on the differences (what > > main functionalities have been added) between branch-1.1/1.2/1.3/1.4 so > > user could better decide which version to choose/upgrade. Should we > > add some explicit document on this? Or release note of the first release > > for each branch is enough? Thanks. > > and I still agree to do it. I'll write it up while the RC is under > evaluation. > > ITBLL and replication testing to be performed on a small cluster once we > have the RC binaries. > > Anything else? (Within reason...) > > -- > Best regards, > Andrew > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's > decrepit hands > - A23, Crosstalk > --001a113d83b2920982055db4b298--