Yeah. Sorry. That's not good. I usually make sure that does not happen, but I missed that one.
I don't know what to do about issues like this. The RM's can't possibly watch all issues. Another area where I find this a lot is with bug fixes that are committed to 0.96 or 0.98 and later, but the committer forgets about 0.94. I try to catch all these things, but some will slip. So here's a renewed call to all committers (including myself): - There should never be a feature gap (i.e. a feature in 0.94, not in 0.96, but then again 0.98). All committers should check for that. - Bugfixes should always be considered as to whether they'd useful for earlier releases. Unless the area of code is new the likely answer is yes. -- Lars ________________________________ From: Stack <[email protected]> To: HBase Dev List <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 11:12 AM Subject: Re: Regressions on upgrading from 0.94 to 0.96 On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Ishan Chhabra <[email protected]>wrote: > When looking at HBASE-8063< > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8063>, > I noticed that it was backported to 0.94 > (HBASE-8198<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8198>) > but not to 0.96. I don't know if this was intentional or if it was just > missed. Missing this patch could impact performance on certain kinds of > queries. > We try to avoid having older versions have features that are then missing from later versions. The commit to 0.94 is done w/o comment/justification in the issue. Maybe a discussion was held elsewhere and not cited. > > Are there any other known features/fixes that did not get ported to 0.96 > but got ported to 0.94? > Hopefully none Ishan. It is a but in our process if there is. St.Ack
