On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 1:07 PM Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Would they do that before or after we designate it stable? Asking, not > trying to be difficult. Kind of a chicken and egg problem? > > Before the release was designated stable. > It would be fine I think to consider reported experience when and if it > happens but can't be primary criteria because it has nothing directly to do > with our PMC or project. We need a criteria we as project and PMC can > achieve and implement effectively, and IMHO "one of our project devs has it > running" does not meet that requirement, because this depends on third > party organizations (a dev's employer, and such) and idiosyncratic > criteria. > > That's fair. It would be better if we spec'd what a 'stable release' is and then ran candidates through the hoops. S > > > On Mar 18, 2021, at 12:47 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 11:55 AM Andrew Purtell < > andrew.purt...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> And how would we know we have one? We don't track usage telemetry. > >> > >> > > Someone of us w/ standing volunteers that they have made the move (was > what > > I was thinking). > > S > > > > > > > > > >> > >>>> On Mar 18, 2021, at 11:29 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 1:49 PM Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>>> I would like to propose we update the 'stable' release pointer, > >> currently > >>>> pointing at 2.3.4, to 2.4.2. > >>>> > >>>> In my testing with aggressive chaos and ITBLL (but in, unfortunately, > >> due > >>>> to resource constraints, in small cluster settings of approximately 10 > >>>> nodes) 2.4.2 is very stable. > >>>> > >>>> Our sister project Phoenix has updated their build system to support > >>>> building against 2.4.1 and later, and the stability of their unit and > >>>> integration test suite is not impacted by any known HBase issue. > >>>> > >>>> If there is other criteria that should be considered, I'd like for us > to > >>>> discuss it. Does there need to be public acknowledgement of a > production > >>>> user? At scale? (How would we know?) Would you like me to attempt an > >>>> at-scale test? On the order of 100 nodes might be possible? If so, > what > >>>> should be the test scenario and criteria for success? What > distinguishes > >>>> 2.3.x (2.3.4) from 2.4.x (2.4.2) at this point? What would be the > >> area(s) > >>>> of concern with respect to moving the stable pointer forward? > >>>> > >>>> > >>> I suggest a happy production deploy as a prerequisite to moving the > >> pointer. > >>> S > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Best regards, > >>>> Andrew > >>>> > >>>> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's > >>>> decrepit hands > >>>> - A23, Crosstalk > >>>> > >> >
