Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hive-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hive-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E555810729 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 19:33:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 51272 invoked by uid 500); 9 Feb 2015 19:33:24 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hive-dev-archive@hive.apache.org Received: (qmail 51209 invoked by uid 500); 9 Feb 2015 19:33:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hive.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@hive.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@hive.apache.org Received: (qmail 51197 invoked by uid 99); 9 Feb 2015 19:33:24 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 19:33:24 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of vikram.dixit@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.50 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.218.50] (HELO mail-oi0-f50.google.com) (209.85.218.50) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 19:32:59 +0000 Received: by mail-oi0-f50.google.com with SMTP id v1so8930277oia.9 for ; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 11:32:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=BBSe+8Rqkm/BQsV5yhu6CMx+2RaxABSbs+M1aGUbH2s=; b=AYl4I/wofRRpgPW7eemndsSrfsFW4B/4RN4yKbgtDnRIVKv0fj6nRbkwnAtAakpAWz 8fSpVNTw/ZNoLNO3FxNJI8uHQyUoDrx8c3C9mFPj4lc2IGUVu3MqtOajVnlZA1LPr+f4 WWBaWFIMqK9lrSHbjK8DlACMSTMsS3lB0BbEX0msM7WCKy8s4oDd3d36+/n0klihyARe Tte0L7OoYIWu3+pxeNhJPhtRzDQ256cTAb1bI9VoHFHi8LbDUf7BluVtXxWaWtCtf3UV tV0U9Jp+6X3g6gUzb6nATftB/zxhp/4xebHcXRbQDU0TEgYfWpFg1yo6YNjkCfdXz7UL mG0w== X-Received: by 10.202.59.131 with SMTP id i125mr12271708oia.125.1423510377194; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 11:32:57 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.48.10 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 11:32:36 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <54D8E9A6.8070104@gmail.com> References: <54C098BA.5030300@apache.org> <54C159AD.4020107@hortonworks.com> <54D8E9A6.8070104@gmail.com> From: Vikram Dixit K Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 11:32:36 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Created branch 1.0 To: dev@hive.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary=001a113cc3565e0daf050eacd6d8 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --001a113cc3565e0daf050eacd6d8 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113cc3565e0dab050eacd6d7 --001a113cc3565e0dab050eacd6d7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Ed, This was the case with 0.14. It was fixed before 1.0 went out in HIVE-8933. Thanks Vikram. On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Alan Gates wrote: > That's fixed, correct? I do not believe there were any SNAPSHOT > dependencies in 1.0. > > Alan. > > Edward Capriolo > February 9, 2015 at 8:40 > Because we can not really have a stable api if by definition we build > around snapshot dependencies. > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Edward Capriolo > > > Edward Capriolo > February 9, 2015 at 8:38 > 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? > > > Brock Noland > January 22, 2015 at 22:06 > 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 > Xuefu Zhang > January 22, 2015 at 12:31 > 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 > > > Alan Gates > January 22, 2015 at 12:12 > 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. > > -- Nothing better than when appreciated for hard work. -Mark --001a113cc3565e0dab050eacd6d7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Ed,

This was the case with 0.14. It was fixed be= fore 1.0 went out in HIVE-8933.

Thanks
Vikram.

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 9:0= 8 AM, Alan Gates <alanfgates@gmail.com> wrote:
That's fixed, correct?=C2=A0 = I=20 do not believe there were any SNAPSHOT dependencies in 1.0.

Alan.

=20 February 9, 2015= =20 at 8:40
Beca= use we can not really=20 have a stable api if by definition we build
around snapshot=20 dependencies.

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Edward Capriolo=20 <edlinuxguru@= gmail.com>

=20 February 9, 2015= =20 at 8:38
Ques= tion.

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

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


=20 January 22, 2015= =20 at 22:06
Hi A= lan,

I agree=20 with Xuefu and what was suggested in your statement. I was
thinking=20 we'd release the next release as 0.15 and then later there
would be= =20 1.0 off trunk (e.g. what would have been 0.16) and thus be
superset=20 (minus anything we intentionally remove).

As I have said several=20 times, I'd like to release more often so I feel
we could even start= =20 the 1.0 work shortly after the 0.15 release. For
my part, I do agree=20 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= =20 be too hard as it's more or less obvious what
our public API is=20 today.

Hope this seems reasonable.

Cheers,
Brock
=
=20 January 22, 2015= =20 at 12:31
Hi T= hejas/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.
H= owever, 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.

An= other 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
improve= ment in functionality as well as stability. Mutating from 0.14.1
release=20 seems falling short in that expectation.

Having said that, I'd= =20 think it makes more sense to release 0.15 as 0.15,
and later we=20 release 1.0 as the major release that supersedes any previous
releases. That will fulfill the expectations of a major release.

Thanks,
X= uefu


=20 January 22, 2015= =20 at 12:12
I had one clarifying=20 question for Brock and Xuefu.=C2=A0 Was your proposal to still call the=20 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?=C2=A0 Or did you want to call= =20 what is now 0.15 1.0?=C2=A0 If you wanted 1.0 to be post 0.15, are you ok= =20 with stipulating that the next release from trunk after 0.15 (what would have been 0.16) is 1.0?

Alan.




--
Nothing better than when appreciated for hard work.
-Mark
--001a113cc3565e0dab050eacd6d7-- --001a113cc3565e0daf050eacd6d8--