From dev-return-71583-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@hbase.apache.org Wed Nov 7 20:31:48 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id C164D180649 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 20:31:47 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 6738 invoked by uid 500); 7 Nov 2018 19:31:46 -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 6727 invoked by uid 99); 7 Nov 2018 19:31:46 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mailrelay1-lw-us.apache.org) (207.244.88.152) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 07 Nov 2018 19:31:46 +0000 Received: from mail-qk1-f174.google.com (mail-qk1-f174.google.com [209.85.222.174]) by mailrelay1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id E15191727 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 19:31:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qk1-f174.google.com with SMTP id o125so22473589qkf.3 for ; Wed, 07 Nov 2018 11:31:45 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gJWmOgckKrQJeoyIm4cNS33xDS/wmX3OW79dG82FyHmj47tduxr ASssQBPZZVgXy9UO+WLF9+Hzd2Kg09L03ygLEiM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5e0FhEIlsvzlW4pV8hV1fOLpCAAd6LTpLH8gTTDT6j3jdVYYWniVjKa4YhUGIKJRspQPRiIXAI6jPp6/Q6ATgw= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7482:: with SMTP id v2-v6mr1576137qtq.251.1541619105571; Wed, 07 Nov 2018 11:31:45 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Sean Busbey Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2018 13:31:33 -0600 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: [DISCUSS] Release cadence for HBase 2.y To: dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi folks! Some time ago we talked about trying to get back on track for a more regular cadence of minor releases rather than maintenance releases (like how we did back pre-1.0). That never quite worked out for the HBase 1.y line, but is still something we could make happen for HBase 2. We're coming up on 4 months since the 2.1 release line started. ATM there are 63 issues in JIRA that claim to be in 2.2.0 and not in any 2.1.z version[1]. The main argument against starting to do a 2.2.0 release is that nothing springs out of that list as a "feature" that would entice users to upgrade. Waiting for these kinds of selling points to drive a release is commonly referred to as "feature based releases." I think it would be fair to characterize the HBase 2.0 release as feature based centered on AMv2. An alternative to feature based releases is date based releases where we decide that e.g. we'll have a minor release each month regardless of how much is included in it. This is sometimes also called "train releases" as an analogy to how trains leave a station on a set schedule without regard to which individual passengers are ready. Just as you'd catch the next scheduled train if you miss-timed your arrival, fixes or features that aren't ready just go in the next regular release. Personally, I really like the idea of doing date based releases for minor releases with maintenance releases essentially only happening on whatever our "stable" designator points at. It would mean those who don't want the risk and benefits of our current release-ready work could stay on a defined path while we could move away from maintaining a ton of branches, some of which don't even see releases (currently ~3 that are > 3 months since a release). If some folks had a specific need for a different minor release line and were willing to do the backport and RM work for that line, they'd of course be free to do so. I know there are some current unknowns around 2.2 specifically. I think stack mentioned to me that there's an upgrade consideration that we need to hammer out since I don't see anything specific to 2.2 in the "Upgrade Paths" section of the ref guide right now. While I am interested in getting 2.2 going specifically, I'd like to make sure we address the general topic of regularly getting new minor releases out. If we already had an expectation that there'd be a minor release every e.g. month or 2 months then I expect whatever upgrade issue would have been addressed as a part of the change that caused it going in. What do folks think? [1]: https://s.apache.org/AAma