Mailing-List: contact zookeeper-user-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of ted.dunning@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.216.176 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :cc:content-type;
        b=uQ7QLiu3XUuaMeMo+FJs1ywP7UJUbJ0+TBKTCVpMrSB2a6dNVPIgWs7U5Y1jttbYvs
         +rrbEDgOXPvOpiBEvY2iFhzQb5K9MoeQHSfImrTXWkiaqBTLd4LH0/RqkeMgus1iDa/u
         CzpuSVfHIFyjV7tHAlVglMYsv0bqXoLGjzCVM=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikNskRTJjmYp4i=GN+KethdJt60dannrPxG-umH@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTim0or2ETZ9UFgNbN=wiBBoZAHV9RuqTbnwGrT8B@mail.gmail.com>
 <AANLkTintz2htMnnC-dopUDC-XqGN2W5AS_ouocRn=C=w@mail.gmail.com>
 <AANLkTi=7J0+uzh5pgTMdOb78DoakPrhd9tJ0JNJBLJpn@mail.gmail.com>
 <AANLkTikNskRTJjmYp4i=GN+KethdJt60dannrPxG-umH@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 17:43:06 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTimgW_5yV3YbrTiX-bWGAsJZaD=B8jO-BTBs4bKU@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: ZK compatability
To: zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache.org
Cc: junrao@gmail.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba53a0c0952d850491837b0e

--90e6ba53a0c0952d850491837b0e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Looking forward, I don't think that anybody has even proposed anything that
would require a major release yet.

That should mean that you have quite a bit of lifetime ahead on the 3.x
family.  Moreover, it is a cinch to bet that
even when a 4.0 is released, it is unlikely to have enough killer features
to drive wholesale adoption right away.

That means that there will be a 3.x bug-fix branch for quite a while even
after 4.x versions come out.

ZK has the least operations overhead of any software I have ever deployed in
to a system.  The worst problem is
that you have to document procedures because you don't have to touch ZK
often enough to remember them
accurately.

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Patrick Hunt <phunt@apache.org> wrote:

> Historically major releases can have non-bw compatible changes.  However if
> you look back through the release history you'll see that the last time
> that
> happened was oct 2008, when we moved the project from sourceforge to
> apache.
>
> Patrick
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Jun Rao <junrao@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > What about major releases going forward? Thanks,
>

--90e6ba53a0c0952d850491837b0e--