On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...A simple 1.x to 2.x upgrade path +1 > ....with bulletproof rollback. > > > Do we have to do this? It will cost a load of dev time that I suggest would be better spent on ensuring the forward migration just 'works'. S > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 11:10 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > All sounds excellent to me. Thanks Stephen and Matteo. > > > > As per Enis, only odd part is this alpha/beta categorization. We've not > > done that before. See the refguide where we talk up 'Development Series' > > just under the 'Pre 1.0 versions' section here: > > http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning.pre10 > > > > Would be sweet if we could get the logical tier inserted too before the > > release of hbase-2.0.0 (I know Matteo probably ruled it out as too far > out > > to land in time but I'm the eternal optimist...) > > > > Thanks, > > M > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Stephen Jiang <syuanjiang...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hello, All, > > > > > > It is time to discuss about the schedule of HBase 2.0 release. HBase > 2.0 > > > release is a big major release. When we release 1.0, we had 0.99 as > dev > > > preview/beta release. We should do something similar for the 2.0 > > release. > > > > > > Matteo and I talked about this. We think about that we need some > > > Alpha/Beta milestones before the RC and final Release-to-Web 2.0 > release. > > > > > > I don't know whether there is any discussion on this community about > the > > > Alpha/Beta release criteria. My proposal is that once we cut the > > branch-2, > > > we should only have new features that are absolutely needed for major > > > release (festures cannot be added in minor release) and those features > > > should be "almost ready". For Alpha releases, we can still accept > these > > > kind of features; for Beta release, only bug fixes and performance > > > improvement on existing features (should we also accept existing > feature > > > improvement in Beta? Maybe Beta 1, Not in Beta 2 - that is my take). > > > > > > This is a big release and requires a lot of work from Release > Manager. I > > > asked Matteo whether I could help to be some kind of backup / > > hot-standby / > > > assistant RM. I think he is very happy to have someone to share some > RM > > > duties. Thus, I will help make this 2.0 release as smooth as possible. > > > > > > Here is a tentative plan: > > > - For now, we are thinking of creating branch-2 middle of this month > and > > > have 2.0-Alpha1 release at the end of this month or begin of Nov. The > > > definition of Alpha1 is that we could deploy to a cluster and it can do > > > some simple CRUD and table DDLs; and not crash (of course, UT passing). > > > > > > - Then we will have 2.0-Alpha2 in 4-6 weeks after Apha1. It would hold > > > higher bar. We will run some IT tests to make sure that it would > > > functional. > > > > > > - At that time, we will lock down and not allow any new features, every > > 4-6 > > > weeks, we will have a Beta release (my realistic guess is that we would > > hit > > > the US Christmas holiday at that time, so first Beta would take longer > > than > > > 6 weeks). For Beta release, we would fix bugs and do performance > tuning. > > > Planning to have 2 Betas. (Question: in the past, do we need vote to > > have > > > a Beta release?) > > > > > > - Once the code are in the stable stage, then we will have RCs and vote > > for > > > the final release. > > > > > > Please let us know whether this is a reasonable approach that will make > > the > > > release successful. > > > > > > Currently, we are aware of the following on-going new features for 2.0: > > new > > > Assignment Manager, backup/restore, off-heap, protobuff 3, Hybrid > Logical > > > Clock, and maybe AsyncRegion / C++ client). If you have a feature that > > > wants to be part of 2.0 release, please send discussion to dev > community > > > and we can make a call on accepting/rejecting. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Stephen > > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) >
