On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Josh Elser <josh.el...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > To me, it seems like the argument may be coming down to whether or not we > break 0.20 hadoop compatibility on a bug-fix release and how concerned we > are about letting users lag behind the upstream development. > > > I think the existing tickets under the umbrella of ACCUMULO-1790 should >> ensure that we end up with a single 1.4 line that can work with either the >> existing 0.20.203.0 claimed in releases or against 2.2.0. >> >> Bill (or Josh or Chris), is there stronger language you'd like to see >> around docs / packaging (area #3 in the original plan and currently >> ACCUMULO-1796)? Maybe expressly only doing a binary convenience package >> for >> 0.20.203.0? Are you looking for something beyond a full release suite to >> ensure 1.4 is still maintaining compatibility on Hadoop 0.20.203? >> >> > Again, my biggest concern here is not following our own guidelines of > breaking changes across minor releases, but I'd hope 0.20 users have an > upgrade path outlined for themselves. > The plan outlined in the original thread, and in the subtasks under ACCUMULO-1790, is expressly aimed at not breaking 0.20 compatibility in the 1.4 bugfix line. If there's anything we can do besides running through the release test suite on a 0.20 cluster to help ensure that, I am interested in adding it to the existing plan. -- Sean
