Agreed! Since Nick has volunteered to RM 1.1 please let me withdraw my earlier volunteerism for that task, unless Nick declines.
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > Thanks for raising this topic Mr Busbey. > > A 1.1 before hbasecon would be sweet. As has been said already, 1.1 has a > bunch of good stuff in it already -- e.g. flush by column family -- so > worthwhile pushing it out soon. > > +1 on Nick for RM because it is good to spread the RM'ing load. > > St.Ack > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Enis Söztutar <enis....@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I would love to see 1.1 in or before May. We already have good stuff in > > branch-1, enough to justify a minor release. Some of the "features" are > > still in the pipeline waiting to be finished (MOB, procV2, etc). > > Personally, I think we should get HBASE-12972, and ProcV2, RPC quotas > (and > > other multi-tenancy improvements not yet backported) and call it 1.1. > > > > I would +1 either Nick or Andrew, both should be excellent RMs. > > > > Enis > > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > FWIW, the Region proposal (HBASE-12972) is ready for review. The > > companion > > > issue for SplitTransaction and RegionMergeTransaction (HBASE-12975) > needs > > > more discussion but could be ready to go in a <= one month timeframe. > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:30 AM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimi...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > I think we can learn a lesson or two from the vendor marketing > machines > > > -- > > > > a release timed with HBaseCon would be ideal in this regard. My > > > obligations > > > > to the event are minimal, so I'm willing to volunteer as RM for 1.1. > Do > > > we > > > > think we can make some of these decisions in time for spinning RC's > in > > > > mid-April? That's just about a month away. > > > > > > > > -n > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Elliott Clark <ecl...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I'm most looking forward to rpc quotas and the buffer improvements > > that > > > > > stack has put in. So for me getting a 1.1 in May 1 would be cool. > > > > > That would allow us to talk about what was just released at > HBaseCon, > > > and > > > > > maybe even have 1.1.0 in production at places. > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Sean Busbey <bus...@cloudera.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > The only reason I can think of to make decisions now would be if > we > > > > want > > > > > to > > > > > > ensure we have consensus for the changes for Phoenix and enough > > time > > > to > > > > > > implement them. > > > > > > > > > > > > Given that AFAIK it's those changes that'll drive having a 1.1 > > > release, > > > > > > seems prudent. But I haven't been tracking the changes lately. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we're all in agreement that something needs to be done, > and > > > > that > > > > > > HBase 1.1 and Phoenix 5 are the places to do it. Probably it > won't > > be > > > > > > contentious to just decide as changes are ready? > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Sean > > > > > > On Mar 13, 2015 1:28 PM, "Andrew Purtell" <apurt...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > That was my question.. We can discuss them independently? Or is > > > > there a > > > > > > > reason not to? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Sean Busbey < > > bus...@cloudera.com > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Andrew Purtell < > > > > > apurt...@apache.org> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do we need to couple decisions for 1.1 and 2.0 in the same > > > > > > discussion? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like what? Interface changes for Phoenix maybe? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Sean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > 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) > > > > > > -- Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
