Hi Cos, I would also request that you renumber the release candidate to just three-numbers, hence "2.0.5-alpha".
Arun, are you willing to start the 2.1.x name-space for your next release, so that 2.0.x-alpha can become an intermediate stabilization branch as Cos and Konst want? I just think that using four-number schemes was symptomatic of the near-forking we had back in the 0.20.xxx.y days, and I really don't want to go back there. Especially since you could say that "0.20.xxx.y" is just three significant numbers, the leading zero being inconsequential. So, would you please consider using 2.0.5-alpha? As for the "2.0.5-SNAPSHOT" in the branch-2 versioning, that's standard usage. Whoever makes the 2.0.5 release (or any "next" release) is expected to update the parent branch's SNAPSHOT default versioning, per HowToReleasePostMavenization#Branching<https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePostMavenization#Branching>, step 6. Thanks, --Matt On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote: > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:57AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > > I see you just re-opened MAPREUDCE-5211. > > > > Why not include MAPREDUCE-5211 as well rather than create one release > per patch? > > Arun, it is unclear if MAPREDUCE-5211 has implications in 2.0.4 as per > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-5211?focusedCommentId=13670574&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13670574 > > Hence, there's a good chance that it never will be backported. And I don't > have any plans to created 'a release per patch'. > > > Also, this is the first time we are seeing a four-numbered scheme in > Hadoop. > > Why not call this 2.0.5-alpha? > > There were precedents in four-numbered schemes before: 0.20.20[3-5].0 > comes to > mind. > > As for 2.0.5-alpha: The release numbering games and votes that had > happened in > the last few weeks are very confusing. Some of them never been concluded, > the > branches are moved and artifact versions seem to be colliding. 2.0.4.x > seems > to work well for the stabilization purposes and it will allow to unblock > downstream and integration projects quickly. > > Cos > > > Arun > > > > On May 24, 2013, at 8:48 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > > > > > All, > > > > > > I have created a release candidate (rc0) for hadoop-2.0.4.1-alpha that > I would > > > like to release. > > > > > > This is a stabilization release that includes fixed for a couple a of > issues > > > discovered in the testing with BigTop 0.6.0 release candidate. > > > > > > The RC is available at: > http://people.apache.org/~cos/hadoop-2.0.4.1-alpha-rc0/ > > > The RC tag in svn is here: > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/hadoop/common/tags/release-2.0.4.1-alpha-rc0 > > > > > > The maven artifacts are available via repository.apache.org. > > > > > > Please try the release bits and vote; the vote will run for the usual > 7 days. > > > > > > Thanks for your voting > > > Cos > > > > > > > >
