From dev-return-52446-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@phoenix.apache.org Tue Jun 12 17:31:41 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id EA016180608 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 17:31:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 2336 invoked by uid 500); 12 Jun 2018 15:31:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@phoenix.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@phoenix.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@phoenix.apache.org Received: (qmail 2325 invoked by uid 99); 12 Jun 2018 15:31:39 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mailrelay2-lw-us.apache.org) (207.244.88.137) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 15:31:39 +0000 Received: from hw13390.local (outbound.hortonworks.com [192.175.27.2]) by mailrelay2-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay2-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id B71EF27BF for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 15:31:38 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] stop minor releases for 0.98 and 1.1 To: dev@phoenix.apache.org References: From: Josh Elser Message-ID: Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 11:31:36 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +1 I think HBase 1.2 is soon to be dropped as well (maybe after 1.2.7, but I might be inventing that). I'm also not so sure about the value behind a 1.3 release either (I think Andrew's 1.4 branch is much more relevant). Getting to and HBase 1.4 and HBase 2.x sounds ideal to me (hopefully, we can avoid a 2.0 and 2.1 schism...), and whatever CDH stuff Pedro wants to support. On 6/11/18 9:47 PM, James Taylor wrote: > It feels like we're trying to maintain too many branches. Both HBase 0.98 > and 1.1 have been EOLed. To ease the burden on devs, how about we stop > maintaining the 4.x-HBase-0.98 and 4.x-HBase-1.1 branches? An RM can always > step up if need be to do a patch release from the 4.14 branches. > > Also, how about the 1.2 branch? If we kept the 4.x-cdh5.11 branch, do we > need the 4.x-HBase-1.2 branch? > > It'd be good if this was decided prior to the biggish splittable system > catalog work (PHOENIX-3534) and omid transaction integration (PHOENIX-3623). > > Thanks, > James >