While I don't disagree that half finished features are undesirable, I'm not 
suggesting that as a strategy so much as we kick out stuff that just doesn't 
seem to be getting done. Pushing 2.0 out another three months is fine if 
there's a good chance this is realistic and we won't be having this discussion 
again then. Let me have a look at the doc and return with specific points for 
further discussion (if any). 


> On Jan 13, 2017, at 11:25 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Stephen Jiang <syuanjiang...@gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> Hello, Andrew, I was a helper on Matteo so that we can help each other
>> while we are focusing on the new Assignment Manager work.  Now he is not
>> available (at least in the next few months).  I have to be more focused on
>> the new AM work; plus other work in my company; it would be too much for me
>> to 2.0 RM alone.  I am happy someone would help to take primary 2.0 RM role
>> while I am still help to make this 2.0 release smooth.
>> 
> 
> (I could help out Stephen. We could co-RM?)
>  
>> For branch-2, I think it is too early to cut it, as we still have a lot of
>> moving parts and on-going project that needs to be part of 2.0.  For
>> example, the mentioned new AM (and other projects, such as HBASE-14414,
>> HBASE-15179, HBASE-14070, HBASE-14850, HBASE-16833, HBASE-15531, just name
>> a few).  Cutting branch now would add burden to complete those projects.
>> 
> 
> Agree with Stephen. A bunch of stuff is half-baked so a '2.0.0' now would be 
> all loose ends and it'd make for a messy narrative.
> 
> I started a doc listing state of 2.0.0: 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit?usp=sharing
> 
> In the doc I made an estimate of what the community considers core 2.0.0 
> items based in part off old lists and after survey of current state of JIRA. 
> The doc is open for comment. Please chime in if I am off or if I am missing 
> something that should be included. I also make a rough estimate on state of 
> each core item.
> 
> I intend to keep up this macro-view doc as we progress on 2.0.0 with 
> reflection where pertinent in JIRA . Suggest we branch only when code compete 
> on the core set most of which are complete or near-so. End-of-February should 
> be time enough (First 2.0.0 RC in at the start of May?).
> 
> Thanks,
> St.Ack
> 
>  
>> thanks
>> Stephen
>> 
>> On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I've heard a rumor the co-RM situation with 2.0 may have changed. Can we
>> > get an update from co-RMs Matteo and Steven on their availability and
>> > interest in continuing in this role?
>> >
>> > To assist in moving 2.0 forward I intend to branch branch-2 from master
>> > next week. Unless there is an objection I will take this action under
>> > assumption of lazy consensus. Master branch will be renumbered to
>> > 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT. Once we have a branch-2 I will immediately begin scale
>> > tests and stabilization (via bug fixes or reverts of unfinished work) and
>> > invite interested collaborators to do the same.
>> >
>> >
>> >
> 

Reply via email to