phoenix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
Date Wed, 02 Nov 2016 22:40:37 GMT
Go ahead lars :-)

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:37 PM, <larsh@apache.org> wrote:

> Great. 14 fixes in a patch release. That's a healthy number.
> Andy, didn't react to your earlier offer... Did you want to do the 4.8.2
> release? Fine either way.
>
> -- Lars
>       From: Samarth Jain <samarth.jain@gmail.com>
>  To: dev <dev@phoenix.apache.org>; larsh@apache.org
>  Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:31 PM
>  Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
>
> Changes in PHOENIX-3432 were committed as part of PHOENIX-3436.
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:29 PM, <larsh@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Need to wait PHOENIX-3432 in both branches.
>
>       From: "larsh@apache.org" <larsh@apache.org>
>  To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org" <dev@phoenix.apache.org>
>  Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:27 PM
>  Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
>
> I'll clean up Jira for 4.8.2 and spin the RCs. Today and/or early tomorrow.
>
>       From: James Taylor <jamestaylor@apache.org>
>  To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org" <dev@phoenix.apache.org>
> Cc: lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org>
>  Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:00 PM
>  Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
>
> I'm in support of 4.8.2. I was just pointing out that we've already started
> the release process for 4.9 as your prior email seemed to indicate that
> perhaps you weren't aware of that.
>
> On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > There was an earlier discussion here regarding supporting multiple code
> > lines. There seemed to be support for that. That implies maintenance of
> at
> > least one code line prior to the most recent, no? Or otherwise nothing
> has
> > changed, leaving all users who can't use or don't want the bleeding edge
> to
> > patch for themselves.
> >
> > And, especially because 4.8.x won't work with 1.2 at all, I think a
> release
> > that fixes that problem before moving on from 4.8 is a responsible thing
> to
> > do.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:34 PM, James Taylor <jamestaylor@apache.org
> > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > > Sounds good, except we've already moved on to 4.9 as we're voting on it
> > > now. Second RC will be up today.
> > >
> > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> > <javascript:;>>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes please I think we need a 4.8.x that fixes PHOENIX-3407 on 1.2+
> > before
> > > > moving on to 4.9 and up.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM, <larsh@apache.org <javascript:;>
> > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Was going to do it this week. Then again, since 4.9.0 does not
> > include
> > > > the
> > > > > column encoding I was less enthused about it.If we think we want
a
> > > 4.8.2
> > > > > I'll spin an RC today.
> > > > > -- Lars
> > > > >
> > > > >      From: Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org <javascript:;>
> > <javascript:;>>
> > > > >  To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org <javascript:;> <javascript:;>"
<
> > dev@phoenix.apache.org <javascript:;>
> > > > <javascript:;>>
> > > > > Cc: lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org <javascript:;> <javascript:;>>
> > > > >  Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 11:41 AM
> > > > >  Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
> > > > >
> > > > > Right, I think we should address PHOENIX-3407 in current 4.8.x
> > releases
> > > > > with a fixed version of it. I don't think we can ever fully
> > understand
> > > > the
> > > > > version usage patterns of our users. I've seen folks write in to
> > HBase
> > > > > lists using 4 year old releases for unfathomable reasons.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, James Taylor <
> > jamestaylor@apache.org <javascript:;>
> > > > <javascript:;>>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1
> who
> > > > would
> > > > > > not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for
a
> 4.9.0
> > > > which
> > > > > > has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible
(as
> > > usual)
> > > > > > with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move
> to
> > > > 4.9.0.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465),
> > > users
> > > > > on
> > > > > > HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > James
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > apurtell@apache.org <javascript:;>
> > > > <javascript:;>>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making
a
> > > > Phoenix
> > > > > > > release.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 PM, James Taylor <
> > > > jamestaylor@apache.org <javascript:;> <javascript:;>>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe
(by
> > > > 10/31)
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > the column encoding work (PHOENIX-1598 and PHOENIX-2565)
and
> > > > > PHOENIX-6
> > > > > > > > (atomic insert/update).  If it's too much much for
you to do
> > both
> > > > > 4.8.2
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > 4.9 simultaneously, I can volunteer to be the RM for
4.9.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:42 PM, <larsh@apache.org
> > <javascript:;>
> > > <javascript:;>>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > > we have 20 jiras against 4.8.2 some of which
seem important
> > > > enough
> > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > over 200 against 4.9.0.
> > > > > > > > > I think we should start keeping stable branches
for
> longer.As
> > > > > before
> > > > > > > I'll
> > > > > > > > > volunteer doing 4.8.2 as well as a 4.9.0.
> > > > > > > > > Let's think about a 4.8.2 in two weeks or so,
unless
> there're
> > > > > vastly
> > > > > > > > > different opinions.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -- Lars
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >    - Andy
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting
back. -
> > Piet
> > > > > Hein
> > > > > > > (via Tom White)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > >
> > > > >  - Andy
> > > > >
> > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> > > Hein
> > > > > (via Tom White)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > >    - Andy
> > > >
> > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> > Hein
> > > > (via Tom White)
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> >    - Andy
> >
> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> > (via Tom White)
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)

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