tajo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jinho Kim <jh...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] 0.8 release preparation
Date Thu, 20 Feb 2014 01:26:01 GMT
+1

-Jinho


2014-02-20 10:12 GMT+09:00 JaeHwa Jung <jhjung@gruter.com>:

> +1! :)
>
>
> 2014-02-20 10:00 GMT+09:00 Min Zhou <coderplay@gmail.com>:
>
> > +1 for the approach.
> >
> > Min
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Jihoon Son <ghoonson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1!
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-02-20 9:50 GMT+09:00 Hyunsik Choi <hyunsik@apache.org>:
> > >
> > > > There remain few issues for 0.8. After 0.8, we will refactor resource
> > > > manager, scheduler, and the design of worker part for multi-tenancy
> > > > support. For this, we need to separate the branches right now. If
> there
> > > are
> > > > no objection, I'll create a branch for 0.8. The remain issues for 0.8
> > > will
> > > > be merged to both 0.8 and master branches.
> > > >
> > > > - hyunsik
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Hyunsik Choi <hyunsik@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Henry,
> > > > >
> > > > > I appreciate for correcting my wrong statements. You are right. We
> > will
> > > > > release 0.8 three months after 0.2 release.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't think that we want to release 0.8 before potential
> > graduation,
> > > > and
> > > > > it may be hard to do so even if we want. This is because there
> still
> > > > remain
> > > > > some critical issues that we cannot postpone anymore.
> > > > >
> > > > > The main objective of my claim aforementioned is to make two
> branches
> > > for
> > > > > development after 0.8 release.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Hyunsik
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 2:25 AM, Henry Saputra <hsaputra@apache.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hi Hyunsik, I think you meant will release 0.8 three months after
> > 0.2
> > > > >> release?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Do we want to release 0.8 quickly before potential graduation
> VOTE?
> > > > >> If we do then maybe we could remove the more issues, such as
the
> > > > >> sub-tasks and improvement, and keep only blocking issues.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Henry
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:05 PM, Hyunsik Choi <hyunsik@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> > I'm rescheduling non-critical issues scheduled in 0.8 to
next
> > > release.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > I'm considering the next release versions. So far, we have
had
> > long
> > > > term
> > > > >> > for each release. We released 0.2 seven months after incubation.
> > We
> > > > also
> > > > >> > released 0.8 three months after 0.2 release. It is because
Tajo
> > has
> > > > been
> > > > >> > heavy under development status.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Tajo 0.8 seems a product ready level. I'm expecting that
there
> > would
> > > > be
> > > > >> > additional use cases on products. In order to support them,
we
> > need
> > > to
> > > > >> > release Tajo more frequently with hotfixs.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > So, I would like to propose the develpment based on two
> branches,
> > > > which
> > > > >> one
> > > > >> > is 0.8.x branch and 1.0 branch (master branch in git). 0.8.x
> > branch
> > > > >> will be
> > > > >> > frequently released with hotfixes and new lightwight features.
> 1.0
> > > > >> branch will
> > > > >> > be developed for a complete system. It will embrace even
radical
> > > > changes
> > > > >> > and new features. The next major release, probably 0.9,
would be
> > > > >> branched
> > > > >> > from 1.0 branch.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > If you have any idea, feel free to suggest.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > - hyunsik
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:30 AM, JaeHwa Jung <
> jhjung@gruter.com>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >> Sorry guys, I missed prerequisite.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> 2014/1/20 JaeHwa Jung <jhjung@gruter.com>
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> > +1 for your idea.
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > I also think that this is right time for 0.8 release.
> > > > >> >> > As you mentioned, too time-consuming jobs need
to fix for
> next
> > > > >> release.
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > And we need to check 0.8 document again because
there are not
> > > some
> > > > >> basic
> > > > >> >> > features for users. For example, there is nothing
about
> hadoop
> > > > >> version.
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > 2014/1/18 Hyunsik Choi <hyunsik@apache.org>
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >> Hi folks,
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> It seems to be right time to think about the
0.8-incubating
> > > > release.
> > > > >> >> >> Please take a look at the 0.8 roadmap and the
current
> resolved
> > > > >> issues.
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> - 0.8 Roadmap
> > > > >> >> >> https://wiki.apache.org/tajo/Roadmap
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> - 0.8 unresolved issues
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20TAJO%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%220.8-incubating%22%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Open%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> Most of scheduled feature are all implemented.
Some issues,
> > > > >> push-based
> > > > >> >> >> transmission and improvement of intermediate
data, are
> > > unresolved
> > > > so
> > > > >> >> >> far. However, in my point of view, they are
not critical in
> > this
> > > > >> time.
> > > > >> >> >> I think they can be scheduled to next release.
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> Although there are still bugs listed in 0.8
unresolved
> issues,
> > > we
> > > > >> will
> > > > >> >> >> resolve most of them soon if we concentrate
on bug fix.
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> So, if you agree, I would like to suggest to
prepare 0.8
> > > release.
> > > > I
> > > > >> >> >> just listed some issues which must be resolved
for 0.8
> release
> > > at
> > > > >> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAJO-512.
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> I will wait your idea and suggestion.
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> Thanks,
> > > > >> >> >> Hyunsik
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > --
> > > > >> >> > Thanks,
> > > > >> >> > Jaehwa Jung
> > > > >> >> > Bigdata Platform Team
> > > > >> >> > Gruter
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> --
> > > > >> >> Thanks,
> > > > >> >> Jaehwa Jung
> > > > >> >> Bigdata Platform Team
> > > > >> >> Gruter
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jihoon Son
> > >
> > > Database & Information Systems Group,
> > > Prof. Yon Dohn Chung Lab.
> > > Dept. of Computer Science & Engineering,
> > > Korea University
> > > 1, 5-ga, Anam-dong, Seongbuk-gu,
> > > Seoul, 136-713, Republic of Korea
> > >
> > > Tel : +82-2-3290-3580
> > > E-mail : jihoonson@korea.ac.kr
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > My research interests are distributed systems, parallel computing and
> > bytecode based virtual machine.
> >
> > My profile:
> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/coderplay
> > My blog:
> > http://coderplay.javaeye.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Jaehwa Jung
> Bigdata Platform Team
> Gruter
>

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