On 11/12/13, 12:24 PM, Sean Busbey wrote:
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.
What about the other half: "encouraging" users to lag (soon to be) two
major releases behind?
