Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-tajo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-tajo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6FB6117515 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 03:24:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 74828 invoked by uid 500); 20 Mar 2015 03:24:41 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-tajo-dev-archive@tajo.apache.org Received: (qmail 74791 invoked by uid 500); 20 Mar 2015 03:24:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tajo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@tajo.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@tajo.apache.org Received: (qmail 74779 invoked by uid 99); 20 Mar 2015 03:24:41 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 03:24:41 +0000 Received: from mail-yh0-f43.google.com (mail-yh0-f43.google.com [209.85.213.43]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id B8A201A035C for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 03:24:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yhpt93 with SMTP id t93so34406365yhp.0 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 20:24:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.52.251.75 with SMTP id zi11mr27366715vdc.70.1426821879728; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 20:24:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.14.41 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 20:24:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Dongjoon Hyun Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:24:19 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Beyond 0.10.0 release To: "dev@tajo.apache.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113402064c92f80511afdbca --001a113402064c92f80511afdbca Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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 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 > 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 > 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 > > > 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 > > > 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 > > > 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 > 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 > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> >> >: > > > >> >>> >> > > > >> >>> >> > 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 > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > >> >>> > > > >> > > > > > > --001a113402064c92f80511afdbca--