hive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Edward Capriolo <edlinuxg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Created branch 1.0
Date Mon, 09 Feb 2015 16:38:48 GMT
Question.

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-8614

Did we not just agree in this thread that hive will no long have dependency
that are SNAPSHOT?

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Brock Noland <brock@cloudera.com> wrote:

> Hi Alan,
>
> I agree with Xuefu and what was suggested in your statement. I was
> thinking we'd release the next release as 0.15 and then later there
> would be 1.0 off trunk (e.g. what would have been 0.16) and thus be
> superset (minus anything we intentionally remove).
>
> As I have said several times, I'd like to release more often so I feel
> we could even start the 1.0 work shortly after the 0.15 release. For
> my part, I do agree with some earlier contributor/user sentiment that
> it would be good to have some basic public API defined for 1.0. I
> don't think that will be too hard as it's more or less obvious what
> our public API is today.
>
> Hope this seems reasonable.
>
> Cheers,
> Brock
>
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Xuefu Zhang <xzhang@cloudera.com> wrote:
> > Hi Thejas/Alan,
> >
> > From all the argument, I think there was an assumption that the proposed
> > 1.0 release will be imminent and 0.15 will happen far after that. Based
> on
> > that assumption, 0.15 will become 1.1, which is greater in scope than
> 1.0.
> > However, this assumption may not be true. The confusion will be
> significant
> > if 0.15 is released early as 0.15 before 0.14.1 is released as 1.0.
> >
> > Another concern is that, the proposed release of 1.0 is a subset of of
> > Hive's functionality, and for major releases users are expecting major
> > improvement in functionality as well as stability. Mutating from 0.14.1
> > release seems falling short in that expectation.
> >
> > Having said that, I'd think it makes more sense to release 0.15 as 0.15,
> > and later we release 1.0 as the major release that supersedes any
> previous
> > releases. That will fulfill the expectations of a major release.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Xuefu
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Alan Gates <gates@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I had one clarifying question for Brock and Xuefu.  Was your proposal to
> >> still call the branch from trunk you are planning in a few days 0.15
> (and
> >> hence release it as 0.15) and have 1.0 be a later release?  Or did you
> want
> >> to call what is now 0.15 1.0?  If you wanted 1.0 to be post 0.15, are
> you
> >> ok with stipulating that the next release from trunk after 0.15 (what
> would
> >> have been 0.16) is 1.0?
> >>
> >> Alan.
> >>
> >>   Thejas Nair <thejas@hortonworks.com>
> >>  January 22, 2015 at 12:04
> >> Brock, Xuefu,
> >>
> >> We seem to have trouble reaching to a consensus here. (Please see my
> >> arguments why I don't see this causing confusions, and let me know if
> >> it changes your opinion).
> >> How should we move forward ? Do you think we need to go through a
> >> formal vote regarding the release plan as per hive by-laws ?
> >>
> >>
> >>   Thejas Nair <thejas@hortonworks.com>
> >>  January 22, 2015 at 10:38
> >> I don't see any reasons for confusion.
> >> From a user perspective, 1.0 is going to have a super set of changes of
> >> 0.14.
> >> 1.1 (based on planned 0.15 release) will have a super set of changes in
> >> 1.0 .
> >>
> >>
> >>   Xuefu Zhang <xzhang@cloudera.com>
> >>  January 21, 2015 at 22:47
> >> I strongly believe that the concept of 1.0 out of a branch as proposed
> is
> >> creating the greatest confusion in the community. If for any reason that
> >> 1.0 cannot be cut from the trunk, that means that we are not ready and
> so
> >> shall wait until so before considering such a release. Thus, I'd -1 on
> this
> >> proposal.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Xuefu
> >>
> >>
> >>   Gopal V <gopalv@apache.org>
> >>  January 21, 2015 at 22:29
> >> On 1/21/15, 7:09 PM, Brock Noland wrote:
> >>
> >> Too be clear I strongly feel creating 1.0 from 0.14 will be confusing.
> In
> >> fact it's already crrated confusion amongst folks on this list.
> >> Furthermore
> >> 1.0 should be created from trunk and be a superset of previous releases.
> >>
> >>
> >> I don't think there is any confusion over that - 1.0 is a long-term
> >> maintenance which is going to be a super-set of all *critical fixes*
> made
> >> from here on (emphasis).
> >>
> >> In fact, a long-term support release should be released off an actively
> >> updated maintenance branch, which has been baked-in and never from the
> >> trunk.
> >>
> >> Those who have followed the earlier mails would realize that the most
> >> important "feature" about this branch is to stick to only long term
> >> maintenance - which in effect is adopting HBase's successful idea.
> >>
> >> That is just plain solid engineering.
> >>
> >> Anyway, it would be in the best interests of the larger community, to
> find
> >> out who else finds that approach confusing.
> >>
> >> Brock, I'm not sure whether you are confused or whether you think other
> >> people will be confused (and if so, why?).
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Gopal
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Vikram Dixit K <vikram.dixit@gmail.com
> >
> >> <vikram.dixit@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> @Brock,
> >>
> >> I created this branch from 0.14. I created this branch based on the
> email
> >> thread discussing 1.0,
> >>
> >> http://search-hadoop.com/m/8er9YGX8g2
> >>
> >> where you had said you agreed with the suggestion from Enis from HBase
> who
> >> said that we should base 1.0 on a stable version rather than making it a
> >> feature release.
> >>
> >> @Lefty,
> >>
> >> You are right in that branch 0.14 has been made 1.0. You are also right
> >> that 0.15 would be 1.1.0 and we should capture that.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Vikram.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Thejas Nair <thejas@hortonworks.com>
> >> <thejas@hortonworks.com>
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Lefty,
> >> Yes, you are right. Anything that is not fixed in 0.14 and is fixed in
> >> 1.0 would have 1.0 as the fixed version.
> >> Yes, 0.15.0 would then become 1.1.0 .
> >>
> >> Yes, it is a good idea to document this translation somewhere.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Lefty Leverenz <
> leftyleverenz@gmail.com>
> >> <leftyleverenz@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > So my initial impression was correct -- instead of calling it release
> >> > 0.14.1, we're calling it 1.0.0. Or am I hopelessly confused?
> >> >
> >> > Will 0.15.0 be 1.1.0? (If so, I'll need to edit a dozen wikidocs.)
> >> >
> >> > Will release numbers get changed in JIRA issues? Presumably that's not
> >> > possible in old comments, so we should document the equivalences
> >> > somewhere. A JIRA issue for that with a well-phrased summary could
> help
> >> > future searchers.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -- Lefty
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 2:47 PM, Eugene Koifman <
> >> ekoifman@hortonworks.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> could we include HIVE-9390 & HIVE-9404? This has been committed
to
> >> trunk.
> >> >> They add useful retry logic to support insert/update/delete
> >> functionality.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 1:06 PM, Vikram Dixit K <
> >>
> >> vikram.dixit@gmail.com
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Hi Folks,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I have created branch 1.0 as discussed earlier. All the jiras
that
> >> have
> >> >> > 0.14 as the fix version should be committed to 1.0 branch instead.
> >>
> >> The
> >>
> >> >> list
> >> >> > of jiras that are being tracked for 1.0 are as follows:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > HIVE-8485
> >> >> > HIVE-9053
> >> >> > HIVE-8996.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Please let me know if you want to include more jiras here. I am
> >> working
> >> >> on
> >> >> > generating javadocs for this. I hope to have an RC out once these
> >> jiras
> >> >> get
> >> >> > in.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Regards
> >> >> > Vikram.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Vaibhav Gumashta <
> >> >> > vgumashta@hortonworks.com
> >> >> > > wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > Hi Vikram,
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > I'd like to get this in: HIVE-8890
> >> >> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-8890>
> >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-8890> [HiveServer2
> >> dynamic
> >> >> > > service discovery: use persistent ephemeral nodes curator
> recipe].
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Thanks,
> >> >> > > --Vaibhav
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 9:29 PM, Alan Gates <
> gates@hortonworks.com
> >>
> >>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > > I'd really like to get HIVE-8966 in there, since it
breaks
> >> streaming
> >> >> > > > ingest. The patch is ready to go, it's just waiting
on a
> >>
> >> review,
> >>
> >> >> which
> >> >> > > > Owen has promised to do soon.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Alan.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Vikram Dixit K <vikram.dixit@gmail.com> <
> vikram.dixit@gmail.com>
> >> >> > > > January 19, 2015 at 18:53
> >> >> > > > Hi All,
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > I am going to be creating the branch 1.0 as mentioned
earlier,
> >> >> > tomorrow.
> >> >> > > I
> >> >> > > > have the following list of jiras that I want to get
committed
> >>
> >> to
> >>
> >> the
> >> >> > > branch
> >> >> > > > before creating an RC.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > HIVE-9112
> >> >> > > > HIVE-6997 : Delete hive server 1
> >> >> > > > HIVE-8485
> >> >> > > > HIVE-9053
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Please let me know if you would like me to include any
other
> >> jiras.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Thanks
> >> >> > > > Vikram.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Vikram Dixit K <
> >> >> > vikram.dixit@gmail.com>
> >> >> > > > <vikram.dixit@gmail.com> <vikram.dixit@gmail.com>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Thejas Nair <thejas@hortonworks.com> <thejas@hortonworks.com>
> >> >> > > > January 1, 2015 at 10:23
> >> >> > > > Yes, 1.0 is a good opportunity to remove some of the
deprecated
> >> >> > > > components. The change to remove HiveServer1 is already
there
> >>
> >> in
> >>
> >> >> trunk
> >> >> > > > , we should include that.
> >> >> > > > We can also use 1.0 release to clarify the public vs
private
> >> status
> >> >> of
> >> >> > > > some of the APIs.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Thanks for the reminder about the documentation status
of
> >>
> >> 1.0. I
> >>
> >> will
> >> >> > > > look at some of them.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Lefty Leverenz
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Lefty Leverenz <leftyleverenz@gmail.com>
> >> <leftyleverenz@gmail.com>
> >> >> > > > December 31, 2014 at 0:12
> >> >> > > > Oh, now I get it. The 1.0.0 *branch* of Hive. Okay.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > -- Lefty
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 11:43 PM, Lefty Leverenz <
> >> >> > > leftyleverenz@gmail.com>
> >> >> > > > <leftyleverenz@gmail.com> <leftyleverenz@gmail.com>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Lefty Leverenz <leftyleverenz@gmail.com>
> >> <leftyleverenz@gmail.com>
> >> >> > > > December 30, 2014 at 23:43
> >> >> > > > I thought x.x.# releases were just for fixups, x.#.x
could
> >>
> >> include
> >>
> >> >> new
> >> >> > > > features, and #.x.x were major releases that might have
some
> >> >> > > > backward-incompatible changes. But I guess we haven't
agreed
> >>
> >> on
> >>
> >> that.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > As for documentation, we still have 84 jiras with TODOC14
> >>
> >> labels
> >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > <
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC14
> >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > <
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC14
> >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > .
> >> >> > > > Not to mention 25 TODOC13 labels
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > <
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC13
> >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > <
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC13
> >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > ,
> >> >> > > > eleven TODOC12
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > <
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC12
> >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > <
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC12
> >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > ,
> >> >> > > > seven TODOC11
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > <
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC11
> >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > <
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC11
> >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > ,
> >> >> > > > and seven TODOC10
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > <
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC10
> >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > <
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC10
> >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > .
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > That's 134 doc tasks to finish for a Hive 1.0.0 release
--
> >> preferably
> >> >> > by
> >> >> > > > the release date, not after. Because expectations are
higher
> >>
> >> for
> >>
> >> >> 1.0.0
> >> >> > > > releases.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > -- Lefty
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Vikram Dixit K <
> >> >> > vikram.dixit@gmail.com>
> >> >> > > > <vikram.dixit@gmail.com> <vikram.dixit@gmail.com>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Vikram Dixit K <vikram.dixit@gmail.com> <
> vikram.dixit@gmail.com>
> >> >> > > > December 30, 2014 at 17:23
> >> >> > > > Hi Folks,
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Given that there have been a number of fixes that have
gone
> >>
> >> into
> >>
> >> >> branch
> >> >> > > > 0.14 in the past 8 weeks, I would like to make a release
> >>
> >> of
> >> 0.14.1
> >>
> >> >> > soon.
> >> >> > > I
> >> >> > > > would like to fix some of the release issues as well
this
> >>
> >> time
> >>
> >> >> around.
> >> >> > I
> >> >> > > am
> >> >> > > > thinking of some time around 15th January for getting
a RC
> >>
> >> out.
> >>
> >> >> Please
> >> >> > > let
> >> >> > > > me know if you have any concerns. Also, from a previous
thread,
> >>
> >> I
> >>
> >> >> would
> >> >> > > > like to make this release the 1.0 branch of hive. The
process
> >>
> >> for
> >>
> >> >> > getting
> >> >> > > > jiras into this release is going to be the same as the
previous
> >> one
> >> >> > viz.:
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > 1. Mark the jira with fix version 0.14.1 and update
the status
> >>
> >> to
> >>
> >> >> > > > blocker/critical.
> >> >> > > > 2. If a committer +1s the patch for 0.14.1, it is good
to
> >>
> >> go in.
> >>
> >> >> Please
> >> >> > > > mention me in the jira in case you are not sure if the
jira
> >>
> >> should
> >>
> >> >> make
> >> >> > > it
> >> >> > > > for 0.14.1.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Thanks
> >> >> > > > Vikram.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >> >> > > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the
individual
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >> >> > entity
> >> >> > > > to which it is addressed and may contain information
that
> >>
> >> is
> >>
> >> >> > > confidential,
> >> >> > > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable
law.
> >>
> >> If
> >> the
> >>
> >> >> > reader
> >> >> > > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
hereby
> >> >> notified
> >> >> > > that
> >> >> > > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution,
disclosure
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >> >> > > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited.
> >>
> >> If you
> >>
> >> have
> >> >> > > > received this communication in error, please contact
the
> >>
> >> sender
> >>
> >> >> > > immediately
> >> >> > > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > --
> >> >> > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >> >> > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >> >> entity
> >> >> > to
> >> >> > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> >> confidential,
> >> >> > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
If
> >>
> >> the
> >>
> >> >> reader
> >> >> > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> >> notified
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >> >> > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you
> >>
> >> have
> >>
> >> >> > > received this communication in error, please contact the
sender
> >> >> > immediately
> >> >> > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Nothing better than when appreciated for hard work.
> >> >> > -Mark
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Eugene
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >> >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> >> entity to
> >> >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> >>
> >> confidential,
> >>
> >> >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> >> reader
> >> >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified
> >> that
> >> >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> >> >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> >> >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> >> immediately
> >> >> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
> >>
> >> to
> >>
> >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> reader
> >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> >>
> >> that
> >>
> >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> >>
> >> immediately
> >>
> >> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Nothing better than when appreciated for hard work.
> >> -Mark
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
> >> to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> confidential,
> >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> reader
> >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> that
> >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately
> >> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >>
>

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