inline
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd consider the compatibility statement a blocker for the release, but not > a blocker for the release plan. > > Certainly. I just don't see it listed on the release plan for something we'd want done prior to releasing. That's the only reason I mentioned it. > I said 2.2, because the only Hadoop releases prior to that in the 2.x > series are alpha/beta releases... and I wouldn't want to have to maintain > compatibility with alpha/beta releases. It may be that those would work > just fine... I just don't want to make it a goal. > > That sounds reasonable to me. I just want to make sure we discuss it in case someone else has a particular need for an earlier compat. > Given our past history of releases, I think Sept 12 would be *way* too > optimistic. This timeline is already shorter than the 1.6 one, but I want > to be practical. If things go more rapidly than we expect, we can release > earlier, but I'd rather not impose an artificial rush on things. > > Didn't 1.6 have a much larger target feature set? I don't recall if a formal set of "what do we want in 1.6" plan happened, but IIRC the meeting notes from the initial video chat discussion had a fairly extensive list. The obvious blocker is going to be the new API. Probably that work can be broken up across multiple people though? -- Sean
