On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 03:18PM, Chris Douglas wrote: > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote: > > There's no misunderstanding Chris - this release is to unblock downstream. > > > > As for your question: I don't have a crystal ball; I wish though. I think > > the > > answer depends on will be there more blocking bugs found in the later > > releases > > of Bigtop or other downstream components. > > This is bugfix release and, I guess, if there are more bugs found in the > > future - more releases would have to be cut. Isn't this is why the software > > is > > being released? > > Sure, but they're all backports from the release currently marked for > 2.0.5. Either (a) these are really blocker bugs and we should roll a > patch release or (b) some bleeding-edge work needs to work around this > while branch-2 is released in the next few weeks. If it's not severe > enough to justify disrupting the versioning of snapshot maven > artifacts in branch-2, then we're clearly not in case (a). > > I thought this was the result of extensive testing, and 2.0.4.1 was a > release to enable additional integration before 2.0.5. If we plan to > roll more releases as a subset of the bug fixes committed to branch-2 > then just call it 2.0.5. Please make sure it- and any future, > intermediate release- is worth the disruption.
There's no plans to release anything else at this point - this is a bug-fix release, as I pointed out on a numerous occasions. There's no new features - just 2 fixes. 2.0.5 matter became and still is too controversial at some point. The vote started by Arun to override the results of the Konstantin's vote never been closed. The downstream projects are handing in the middle of the air because of that confusion. > > Now, the -1: I am not clear about the justification. What exactly we expect > > to > > "work out"? > > It's become fashionable to close threads and count votes in the middle > of the discussion. I changed my vote instead of trusting you. -C Have I missed something or you just called me a cheater and a lair right to my face? Cos > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 01:48PM, Chris Douglas wrote: > >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Arun C Murthy <a...@hortonworks.com> > >> wrote: > >> > Why not include MAPREDUCE-4211 as well rather than create one release > >> > per patch? > >> > >> From Cos's description, it sounded like these were backports of fixes > >> to help Sqoop2 and fix some build issues. If it's not just to fixup > >> leftover bugs in 2.0.4 *once* so downstream projects can integrate > >> against 2.0.4.1, and this a release series, then I've completely > >> misunderstood the purpose. > >> > >> Cos, are you planning 2.0.4.2? > >> > >> > Also, this is the first time we are seeing a four-numbered scheme in > >> > Hadoop. Why not call this 2.0.5-alpha? > >> > >> Good point. Since it contains only backports from branch-2, it would > >> make sense for it to be an intermediate release. > >> > >> I shouldn't have to say this, but I'm changing my vote to -1 while we > >> work this out. -C > >> > >> > 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 > >> >> > >> > > >> >
