Setting aside the Interface discussions, here is my +1 for the RC. +1
Downloaded artifacts, Checked sigs, Checked crcs, Checked the book Checked dir layout in bin and src artifacts Checked jars of hbase and hadoop in bin artifact Checked version strings Run in local mode Run basic smoke tests in shell Run LTT Build the src artifact with hadoop versions 2.2.0,2.3.0,2.4.0, 2.5.0. 2.6.0. Compilation with 2.4.0 and before is broken, but it is ok for this RC. See HBASE-12637 Checked maven repository artifacts by running the hbase-downstreamer project test. Reminder, Sat is the last day to vote on this RC. Please plan to spend some time on the RC so that we can iron out issues for the next 1.0.0RC. Enis On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-1501. Pardon the noise > on > a VOTE thread. > > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Phoenix PMC here, although I'm only speaking my own opinion. Concur, the > > code takes liberties... We need to clean our own house. > > > > On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> > On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Compiling Phoenix master against 0.99.2, I got: > >> > > http://pastebin.com/gaxCs8fT > >> > > > >> > > Some removed methods are in HBase classes that are marked > >> > > with @InterfaceAudience.Private > >> > > I want to get some opinion on whether such methods should be > >> deprecated > >> > > first. > >> > > > >> > >> > >> There is no room for 'opinion' in this area. A bunch of work has been > done > >> to remove ambiguity around our guarantees. The law as it stands is: > >> InterfaceAudience.Private means: "APIs for HBase internals developers. > No > >> guarantees on compatibility or availability in future versions. ..." > (From > >> http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#code.standards). We can add verbiage > >> but > >> you would have to have a perverse squint to interpret this "no > guarantees" > >> as "no guarantees -- after a deprecation cycle". > >> > >> That said, we are an accommodating lot. I suggest you take the list > over > >> to phoenix dev and that phoenix comes back with explicit asks rather > than > >> this blanket list taken from a compile against their master branch. > >> > >> As per Sean, this discussion does not belong on a dev release RC vote > >> thread, nor should it hold up its release. > >> St.Ack > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > > > - Andy > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) >
