Mikhail, I suggest that we create the branch-1.3 now so that you can control what goes in and what not. branch-1 is free for all usually.
Enis On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 9:24 PM, Mikhail Antonov <[email protected]> wrote: > Suddenly we had kind of a spike in jiras filed with fixVersion=1.3 last few > days, and I really want to get it out one of this days, so I want to just > stabilize it now. > > I kicked some jiras labeled as "major" out of 1.3, and if there's something > affecting branch-1.3 but not "Blocker" or "Critical" let's target it for > 1.3.1 and / or 1.4. > > Thanks! > Mikhail > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Mikhail Antonov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I'm not aware of any, and changes made to 1.3 shouldn't render 2.4 > > unsupportable. > > > > On the second thought, if we want to have to maintain less minor releases > > in 1.* line and encourage folks to update, > > we need to keep maintaining those Hadoop versions, yeah. > > > > Let's leave 2.4 as supported. > > > > -Mikhail > > > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 7:11 AM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Mikhail Antonov <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > I'm thinking to move Hadoop 2.4.* from Supported to Not Tested, to > kind > >> of > >> > encourage people to move and have less versions to test. How many > people > >> > want to stick with Hadoop 2.4 yet upgrade to HBase 1.3? > >> > > >> > >> Hadoop 2.4 is still considered a "safe bet" stable release for those > >> in LTM mode. > >> > >> Our compatibility guidelines say that we won't force an incompatible > >> dependency > >> upgrade in a minor version. Do we know if Hadoop 2.4 -> 2.5 includes any > >> documented incompatibilities? > >> > >> -- > >> busbey > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > Michael Antonov > > > > > > -- > Thanks, > Michael Antonov >
