I don't understand your negative tone. What point specifically did I and other people in the conversation miss?
Colin On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Allen Wittenauer <a...@altiscale.com> wrote: > > I don’t whether your ability to completely miss my point every time we > communicate with each other, regardless of the issue, is intentional or just > a special talent. > > On Sep 22, 2015, at 8:52 AM, Colin P. McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote: > >> I think it's extremely unrealistic to expect Hadoop to ever follow a >> branchless development model. In fact, the recent trend has been in >> the opposite direction-- prominent members of the community have >> pointed out that we don't have enough long-running, well-tested and >> well-supported branches. Producing such a branch was the goal of the >> ongoing 2.6.1 release effort. Even if we did somehow switch to a >> branchless development model, we have numerous people backporting >> patches to their own repositories-- both Hadoop vendors and large >> organizations that run Hadoop internally and have their own branches. >> >> Branchless development especially doesn't make sense for HDFS, since >> it would force people to do time-consuming and potentially risky >> layout versions just to get small bugfixes. Very few cluster >> operators want to update the version of their data on-disk just to get >> this month's urgent bugfix. There are similar issues in other parts >> of the stack such as YARN. >> >> Anyway, as Steve pointed out in his original post, merge conflicts in >> CHANGES.txt are not the only problem caused by that file. It's simply >> very inaccurate and misleading, since it must be manually updated. In >> more than 3 years of working with Hadoop, I've never found CHANGES.txt >> useful for anything. git log and JIRA tell you everything you need to >> know. CHANGES.txt is a burden to update, misleading to operators, and >> a relic that should have been removed years ago. >> >> I really hope this CHANGES.txt thread doesn't peter out like the rest >> of them. Please, let's fix this, finally. Autogenerate this file. >> >> best, >> Colin >> >> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 7:10 PM, Allen Wittenauer <a...@altiscale.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Sep 14, 2015, at 5:15 PM, Colin P. McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Let's stay focused on the title of the thread-- CHANGES.txt-- and >>>> discuss issues surrounding releasing trunk in a separate thread. >>> >>> >>> It directly addresses the thread: if one isn’t cherry picking >>> patches because there aren’t multiple primary branches in development, the >>> changes.txt conflicts effectively go away. >
