tajo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dongjoon Hyun <dongj...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION] Beyond 0.10.0 release
Date Fri, 20 Mar 2015 03:24:19 GMT
Hmm. I agree with Hyunsik and Jihoon and no objections for that.

Hyunsik and you didn't say anydate like that. That's true. :-)

Warmly,
Dongjoon.




On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Jihoon Son <jihoonson@apache.org> wrote:

> I was the host of the community meetup yesterday.
>
> We had some discussions on the recent 0.10.0 release.
> In addition, we also had some discussions on our changed release policy
> which is already discussed in our mailing list. Finally, I introduced our
> future roadmap that is also being discussed in this thread.
>
> However, we have NEVER discussed any fixed release schedules. Honestly, we
> don't have any fixed release schedules. I know we have released every 5
> months before, but it was just a coincidence. So, I just said that the tajo
> community is trying to release more faster. The schedules that Dongjoon
> shared in this thread were just the hopes of some PMCs and Committers. It
> does not delegate the Tajo community.
>
> As Hyunsik aforementioned, our release schedule is decided based on
> features. When ALL PMC members agree, it's the time to release.
>
> Sincerely,
> Jihoon
>
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 11:33 AM Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I see. No problem at all for me! Then, I think the final decision is made
> > in Tajo Community.
> > The best and only way is to speed up Tajo Community Activity more.
> > Thank you, Hyunsik!
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Dongjoon.
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 8:05 AM, Hyunsik Choi <hyunsik@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Minor release will be usually depend on our bug fixes. If we find some
> > > critical bug, we should release the bug fix release immediately.
> > > Otherwise, it can be release them monthly by merging recent bug fixes
> > > after some release.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Hyunsik
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Thank you, @hyunsik. I'm happy since the roadmap page has all of the
> > > > details, now.
> > > > By the way, could you mention that Regular Minor Release Plan in any
> > way?
> > > > Or, do you want to omit the Minor Releases like 2014?
> > > > Both are fine to me.
> > > > I just want to work according to Official Tajo Roadmap.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Dongjoon.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 7:35 AM, Hyunsik Choi <hyunsik@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi guys,
> > > >>
> > > >> I roughly updated the roadmap for 0.11.0. Also, I also arranged the
> > > >> roadmap 1.0.0.
> > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TAJO/Tajo+Roadmap
> > > >>
> > > >> I welcome any feedback.
> > > >>
> > > >> Best regards,
> > > >> Hyunsik
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Hyunsik Choi <hyunsik@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >> > If there are no further discussion, I'll update the Roadmap page
> in
> > > wiki.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > - hyunsik
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Dongjoon Hyun <
> dongjoon@apache.org
> > >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >> Absolutely!
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:32 AM, Hyunsik Choi <
> hyunsik@apache.org>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>> It sounds good to me.
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> Also remember 'if it doesn't happen on the mailing list,
it
> > doesn't
> > > >> >>> happen at Apache'. Please read the below mailing list
thread,
> > saying
> > > >> >>> what we must keep.
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>>
> > > >>
> > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev/201303.mbox/%
> > 3CCAJwFCa0CfjFGq5NcG7GNSPEZjg1hvy3NO-5_KfPd2ZXvc-SHKg@mail.gmail.com%3E
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> Best regards,
> > > >> >>> Hyunsik
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Dongjoon Hyun <
> > dongjoon@apache.org
> > > >
> > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > >> >>> > Today we have a Tajo regional meetup in Seoul. What
about
> > > discussing
> > > >> this
> > > >> >>> > issue in detail there?
> > > >> >>> >
> > > >> >>> > Of course, we should post the result here, too.
> > > >> >>> >
> > > >> >>> > Warmly,
> > > >> >>> > Dongjoon
> > > >> >>> >
> > > >> >>> > On Tuesday, March 17, 2015, Jinho Kim <jhkim@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >> >>> >
> > > >> >>> >> The major issues looks good to me for 0.11.0
release
> > > >> >>> >> Thank you.
> > > >> >>> >>
> > > >> >>> >> -Jinho
> > > >> >>> >> Best regards
> > > >> >>> >>
> > > >> >>> >> 2015-03-16 20:13 GMT+09:00 Hyunsik Choi <hyunsik@apache.org
> > > >> >>> <javascript:;>
> > > >> >>> >> >:
> > > >> >>> >>
> > > >> >>> >> > Hi folks,
> > > >> >>> >> >
> > > >> >>> >> > In order to share milestones with you guys
and concentrate
> > our
> > > >> effort
> > > >> >>> >> > on the next release, we need to discuss
the next roadmap.
> > > >> >>> >> > Particularly, I'd like to share our direction
with new
> > > >> contributors
> > > >> >>> >> > due to the growing number of contributors.
> > > >> >>> >> >
> > > >> >>> >> > As far as I know, the following major issues
seem to be
> > > resolved
> > > >> in
> > > >> >>> time.
> > > >> >>> >> >
> > > >> >>> >> > * Nested complex type (
> > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAJO-721
> > > >> >>> )
> > > >> >>> >> > * in subquery (https://issues.apache.org/
> > jira/browse/TAJO-680)
> > > >> >>> >> > * Resource allocation should be fine grained
(TAJO-1397)
> > > >> >>> >> > * ALTER TABLE ADD/DROP PARTITION statement
(TAJO-744)
> > > >> >>> >> > * Python UDF (TAJO-1344)
> > > >> >>> >> >
> > > >> >>> >> > The above issues probably can be included
in 0.11 release.
> If
> > > >> there
> > > >> >>> >> > are missed issues, please let me know them.
> > > >> >>> >> >
> > > >> >>> >> >
> > > >> >>> >> > Besides, the following feature issues may
be on our
> roadmap:
> > > >> >>> >> >
> > > >> >>> >> > * Multi-tenancy query scheduler (TAJO-540)
> > > >> >>> >> > * More SQL features (scalar subquery, ...)
> > > >> >>> >> >   * Decimal type support
> > > >> >>> >> >   * Scalar subquery
> > > >> >>> >> > * OLAP features (rollup, drill down, cube,
..)
> > > >> >>> >> > * More rewrite rules (lots of issues like
Unnesting of
> Nested
> > > >> >>> Subqueries,
> > > >> >>> >> > ...)
> > > >> >>> >> > * Make storage handler more pluggable
> > > >> >>> >> > * Better failure handling of tasks and
nodes (TAJO-1214)
> > > >> >>> >> > * CREATE FUNCTION statement support
> > > >> >>> >> > * CREATE TYPE statement support
> > > >> >>> >> > * ....
> > > >> >>> >> >
> > > >> >>> >> > Most of them are not assigned as far as
I know. In
> addition,
> > > >> there are
> > > >> >>> >> > many performance issues. I'll describe
them later.
> > > >> >>> >> >
> > > >> >>> >> > Anyway, I would be pleasure if we task
about what issues
> you
> > > are
> > > >> >>> >> > considering for 0.11 release or after that.
I'm looking
> > > forward to
> > > >> >>> >> > hearing you guys' feedback.
> > > >> >>> >> >
> > > >> >>> >> >
> > > >> >>> >> > Best regards,
> > > >> >>> >> > Hyunsik
> > > >> >>> >> >
> > > >> >>> >>
> > > >> >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

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