hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stack <st...@duboce.net>
Subject Re: DISCUSS: Heads-up 2.1.5 RC in next few days and suggest EOL'ing 2.1 branch
Date Fri, 17 May 2019 03:47:32 GMT
No problem. I'll can keep up the 2.1 branch and squeeze some more releases
out of it.

Can do the branch-2.0 if we need one there too.

S

On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 8:13 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino219@gmail.com> wrote:

> Usually at least we will keep two minor release lines? I could also take
> the release work of branch-2.1, until 2.3.0 is out.
>
> Allan Yang <allan163@apache.org> 于2019年5月17日周五 上午10:45写道:
>
> > Why so soon... branch-2.2 is not stable yet. branch-2.1 is the only
> stable
> > branch in 2.x since branch-2.0 is already EOL’d.
> > Best Regards
> > Allan Yang
> >
> >
> > 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino219@gmail.com> 于2019年5月17日周五 上午10:23写道:
> >
> > > The next RC for 2.2.0 will be available soon...
> > >
> > > Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org> 于2019年5月17日周五 上午10:13写道:
> > >
> > > > Too early to EOL 2.1.
> > > >
> > > > Also we didn't EOL 2.0 at 2.0.5 because folks wanted a post 2.2.0
> > > release.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 16, 2019, 18:26 Zach York <zyork.contribution@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I like the proactive approach to EOLing branches, but I don't think
> > we
> > > > can
> > > > > quite EOL a branch when there is no newer branch (2.2.0) out. If
> > that's
> > > > > 2.1.6, that's fine.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 3:18 PM Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Was going to put up an RC for 2.1.5 in next day or so after
a
> > review
> > > of
> > > > > > unresolved JIRAs that have 2.1.5 as fix version. It is coming
up
> on
> > > two
> > > > > > months since 2.1.4 and by the time we're done, there'll be 90+
> > > changes.
> > > > > > Branch-2.1 nightlies have started to stabilize again.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Was also thinking of EOL'ing the 2.1 branch. We EOL'd 2.0 branch
> at
> > > > > 2.0.5.
> > > > > > We have too many branches as it is. What do folks think? 2.2.0
> > isn't
> > > > out
> > > > > > yet so maybe wait on 2.1.6? That'd be fine too.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > S
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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