hbase-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mikhail Antonov <olorinb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Status of the 0.98 release line
Date Mon, 10 Apr 2017 19:17:30 GMT
+1 to EOL 0.98.

Thanks Andrew for all the work maintaining it!

-Mikhail

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Dima Spivak <dimaspivak@apache.org> wrote:

> +1
>
> -Dima
>
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> > I agree we should EOL 0.98.
> > St.Ack
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Please speak up if it is incorrect to interpret the lack of responses
> as
> > > indicating consensus on declaring 0.98 EOL.
> > >
> > > I believe we should declare 0.98 EOL.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 6:56 AM, Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Folks!
> > > >
> > > > Back in January our Andrew Purtell stepped down as the release
> > > > manager for the 0.98 release line.
> > > >
> > > > On the resultant dev@hbase thread[1] folks seemed largely in favor
> of
> > > > declaring end-of-maintenance for the 0.98 line.
> > > >
> > > > Now that it's been a couple of months, does anyone have concerns
> about
> > > > pushing forward on that?
> > > >
> > > > Do folks who listen on user@hbase but not dev@hbase have any
> concerns?
> > > >
> > > > As with any end-of-maintenance branch, the PMC would consider on a
> > > > case-by-case basis doing a future release of the branch should a
> > > > critical security vulnerability show up.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [1]: https://s.apache.org/DjCi
> > > >
> > > > -busbey
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > >    - Andy
> > >
> > > If you are given a choice, you believe you have acted freely. - Raymond
> > > Teller (via Peter Watts)
> > >
> >
>



-- 
Thanks,
Michael Antonov

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