On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 8:55 PM, Enis Söztutar <e...@apache.org> wrote:
> Checked the documentation. Both the index.html and book are in the old > format. Nick did you copy the docs from master? This is unfortunate, but > not a blocker to the RC. > I did copy the docs over, but must be there's pom changes that happened on master after branch-1.1 was cut. https://github.com/apache/hbase/commit/4f5b22bc19cb8d24ced5d42ebd9794cfd83bae85 Going through the compat report: > https://people.apache.org/~enis/1.0.1_1.1.0RC0_compat_report.html, a > couple > of interesting things: > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-13551 missed 2 classes > related to proc v2. They should not be Public. > > - AuthUtil should not be Public. > Okay, I've opened HBASE-13661 for this one. Mind commenting there with the proc v2 class names? This seems source incompatibility: > > - RegionScanner.nextRaw ( java.util.List<org.apache.hadoop.hbase.Cell> p1, > int p2 ) [abstract] *:* boolean > > My vote would be -0, since the RegionScanner.nextRaw() although not used > much is a concerning change and breaks source compat. > The RegionScanner change should be acceptable because it's marked as Evolving, though let's discuss. The change came in as part of HBASE-13421: https://github.com/apache/hbase/commit/408b9161754966af80be5046fea657769b24f6a0#diff-87a7898ef24244574a843648feac86b7 On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I'm also traveling today. > > > > I've already extended the vote for this RC to Sunday, and since no one > has > > said this is a -1 -worthy regression, this candidate continues to stand. > > > > On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Andrew Purtell < > andrew.purt...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Formally, -0 > > > > > > Given tomorrow is hbasecon perhaps it would be better to spin a RC on > > > Friday? > > > > > > I can take HBASE-13637 but am sitting on a plane at the moment. Won't > be > > > able to get to it until tonight. > > > > > > > On May 6, 2015, at 10:43 AM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimi...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Andrew Purtell < > > > andrew.purt...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I prefer to patch the POMs. > > > > > > > > Is this a formal -1? > > > > > > > > I've opened HBASE-13637 for tracking this issue. Let's get it fixed > and > > > > I'll spin a new RC tonight. > > > > > > > >>> On May 5, 2015, at 4:16 PM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> So what's the conclusion here? Are we dropping 2.2 support or > > updating > > > >> the > > > >>> poms and sinking the RC? > > > >>> > > > >>>> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Sean Busbey <bus...@cloudera.com> > > > >> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 6:48 PM, Andrew Purtell < > > apurt...@apache.org> > > > >>>> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> We could patch our POMs to reference the hadoop-minikdc artifact > > > >>>>> independently of the rest of the Hadoop packages. It's standalone > > and > > > >>>>> rarely changes. > > > >>>> +1. I've been using HBase to test Hadoop changes for isolating > > > >> dependencies > > > >>>> from downstream folks (HADOOP-11804), and I've just been leaving > the > > > >>>> hadoop-minikdc artifact as-is due to these very reasons. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> -- > > > >>>> Sean > > > >> > > > > > >
