hbase-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Karthik Ranganathan <kranganat...@fb.com>
Subject Re: on HBase 1.0
Date Thu, 17 Nov 2011 00:01:37 GMT
My 2 cents - whatever branch we decide to put out as 1.0, I think we
should have a stability/testing phase without adding too many features, so
that it is pretty stable to end users.


- Karthik


On 11/16/11 3:57 PM, "Andrew Purtell" <apurtell@apache.org> wrote:

>> From: Stack <stack@duboce.net>
>
>> To: dev@hbase.apache.org; Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
>> Cc: "user@hbase.apache.org" <user@hbase.apache.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 3:52 PM
>> Subject: Re: on HBase 1.0
>> 
>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>  It's possible a release of 0.20.20X (X=5 I think) as Hadoop 1.0 is
>> imminent.
>>> 
>>>  The Hadoop 1.0 release is an acknowledgement of reality -- 0.20
>>>branch is 
>> in production at many places.
>>> 
>>>  I know we agreed to separate HBase versioning from Hadoop versioning,
>> but if we continue to number HBase as 0.X after there is a Hadoop 1.0,
>>there is 
>> an implicit marketing message that we feel HBase is not as ready as
>>Hadoop.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  I propose that we consider, if and when Hadoop 1.0 is released, that
>>>we 
>> release HBase 1.0 off of the 0.92 branch. A subsequent release off of
>>trunk 
>> could be 1.1 or 2.0 at the discretion of the RM and community consensus.
>>> 
>> 
>> Agreed.  Was thinking 0.94 could e be 1.0.0 since its getting a load
>> of 0.89-fb branch forward-ports.   Would have to come out right after
>> 0.92 though.
>
>
>Releasing 0.94 as 1.0 like that, for that reason, sounds good to me, but
>I think that would imply 0.92 is merely a stepping stone to 1.0 aka 0.94.
>Perhaps that is accurate.
>
>    - Andy
>


Mime
View raw message