Question. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-8614
Did we not just agree in this thread that hive will no long have dependency that are SNAPSHOT? On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Brock Noland <br...@cloudera.com> wrote: > Hi Alan, > > I agree with Xuefu and what was suggested in your statement. I was > thinking we'd release the next release as 0.15 and then later there > would be 1.0 off trunk (e.g. what would have been 0.16) and thus be > superset (minus anything we intentionally remove). > > As I have said several times, I'd like to release more often so I feel > we could even start the 1.0 work shortly after the 0.15 release. For > my part, I do agree with some earlier contributor/user sentiment that > it would be good to have some basic public API defined for 1.0. I > don't think that will be too hard as it's more or less obvious what > our public API is today. > > Hope this seems reasonable. > > Cheers, > Brock > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Xuefu Zhang <xzh...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > Hi Thejas/Alan, > > > > From all the argument, I think there was an assumption that the proposed > > 1.0 release will be imminent and 0.15 will happen far after that. Based > on > > that assumption, 0.15 will become 1.1, which is greater in scope than > 1.0. > > However, this assumption may not be true. The confusion will be > significant > > if 0.15 is released early as 0.15 before 0.14.1 is released as 1.0. > > > > Another concern is that, the proposed release of 1.0 is a subset of of > > Hive's functionality, and for major releases users are expecting major > > improvement in functionality as well as stability. Mutating from 0.14.1 > > release seems falling short in that expectation. > > > > Having said that, I'd think it makes more sense to release 0.15 as 0.15, > > and later we release 1.0 as the major release that supersedes any > previous > > releases. That will fulfill the expectations of a major release. > > > > Thanks, > > Xuefu > > > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Alan Gates <ga...@hortonworks.com> > wrote: > > > >> I had one clarifying question for Brock and Xuefu. Was your proposal to > >> still call the branch from trunk you are planning in a few days 0.15 > (and > >> hence release it as 0.15) and have 1.0 be a later release? Or did you > want > >> to call what is now 0.15 1.0? If you wanted 1.0 to be post 0.15, are > you > >> ok with stipulating that the next release from trunk after 0.15 (what > would > >> have been 0.16) is 1.0? > >> > >> Alan. > >> > >> Thejas Nair <the...@hortonworks.com> > >> January 22, 2015 at 12:04 > >> Brock, Xuefu, > >> > >> We seem to have trouble reaching to a consensus here. (Please see my > >> arguments why I don't see this causing confusions, and let me know if > >> it changes your opinion). > >> How should we move forward ? Do you think we need to go through a > >> formal vote regarding the release plan as per hive by-laws ? > >> > >> > >> Thejas Nair <the...@hortonworks.com> > >> January 22, 2015 at 10:38 > >> I don't see any reasons for confusion. > >> From a user perspective, 1.0 is going to have a super set of changes of > >> 0.14. > >> 1.1 (based on planned 0.15 release) will have a super set of changes in > >> 1.0 . > >> > >> > >> Xuefu Zhang <xzh...@cloudera.com> > >> January 21, 2015 at 22:47 > >> I strongly believe that the concept of 1.0 out of a branch as proposed > is > >> creating the greatest confusion in the community. If for any reason that > >> 1.0 cannot be cut from the trunk, that means that we are not ready and > so > >> shall wait until so before considering such a release. Thus, I'd -1 on > this > >> proposal. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Xuefu > >> > >> > >> Gopal V <gop...@apache.org> > >> January 21, 2015 at 22:29 > >> On 1/21/15, 7:09 PM, Brock Noland wrote: > >> > >> Too be clear I strongly feel creating 1.0 from 0.14 will be confusing. > In > >> fact it's already crrated confusion amongst folks on this list. > >> Furthermore > >> 1.0 should be created from trunk and be a superset of previous releases. > >> > >> > >> I don't think there is any confusion over that - 1.0 is a long-term > >> maintenance which is going to be a super-set of all *critical fixes* > made > >> from here on (emphasis). > >> > >> In fact, a long-term support release should be released off an actively > >> updated maintenance branch, which has been baked-in and never from the > >> trunk. > >> > >> Those who have followed the earlier mails would realize that the most > >> important "feature" about this branch is to stick to only long term > >> maintenance - which in effect is adopting HBase's successful idea. > >> > >> That is just plain solid engineering. > >> > >> Anyway, it would be in the best interests of the larger community, to > find > >> out who else finds that approach confusing. > >> > >> Brock, I'm not sure whether you are confused or whether you think other > >> people will be confused (and if so, why?). > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Gopal > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Vikram Dixit K <vikram.di...@gmail.com > > > >> <vikram.di...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> @Brock, > >> > >> I created this branch from 0.14. I created this branch based on the > email > >> thread discussing 1.0, > >> > >> http://search-hadoop.com/m/8er9YGX8g2 > >> > >> where you had said you agreed with the suggestion from Enis from HBase > who > >> said that we should base 1.0 on a stable version rather than making it a > >> feature release. > >> > >> @Lefty, > >> > >> You are right in that branch 0.14 has been made 1.0. You are also right > >> that 0.15 would be 1.1.0 and we should capture that. > >> > >> Regards > >> Vikram. > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Thejas Nair <the...@hortonworks.com> > >> <the...@hortonworks.com> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> Hi Lefty, > >> Yes, you are right. Anything that is not fixed in 0.14 and is fixed in > >> 1.0 would have 1.0 as the fixed version. > >> Yes, 0.15.0 would then become 1.1.0 . > >> > >> Yes, it is a good idea to document this translation somewhere. > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Lefty Leverenz < > leftylever...@gmail.com> > >> <leftylever...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > So my initial impression was correct -- instead of calling it release > >> > 0.14.1, we're calling it 1.0.0. Or am I hopelessly confused? > >> > > >> > Will 0.15.0 be 1.1.0? (If so, I'll need to edit a dozen wikidocs.) > >> > > >> > Will release numbers get changed in JIRA issues? Presumably that's not > >> > possible in old comments, so we should document the equivalences > >> > somewhere. A JIRA issue for that with a well-phrased summary could > help > >> > future searchers. > >> > > >> > > >> > -- Lefty > >> > > >> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 2:47 PM, Eugene Koifman < > >> ekoif...@hortonworks.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> could we include HIVE-9390 & HIVE-9404? This has been committed to > >> trunk. > >> >> They add useful retry logic to support insert/update/delete > >> functionality. > >> >> > >> >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 1:06 PM, Vikram Dixit K < > >> > >> vikram.di...@gmail.com > >> > >> > > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > Hi Folks, > >> >> > > >> >> > I have created branch 1.0 as discussed earlier. All the jiras that > >> have > >> >> > 0.14 as the fix version should be committed to 1.0 branch instead. > >> > >> The > >> > >> >> list > >> >> > of jiras that are being tracked for 1.0 are as follows: > >> >> > > >> >> > HIVE-8485 > >> >> > HIVE-9053 > >> >> > HIVE-8996. > >> >> > > >> >> > Please let me know if you want to include more jiras here. I am > >> working > >> >> on > >> >> > generating javadocs for this. I hope to have an RC out once these > >> jiras > >> >> get > >> >> > in. > >> >> > > >> >> > Regards > >> >> > Vikram. > >> >> > > >> >> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Vaibhav Gumashta < > >> >> > vgumas...@hortonworks.com > >> >> > > wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > > Hi Vikram, > >> >> > > > >> >> > > I'd like to get this in: HIVE-8890 > >> >> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-8890> > >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-8890> [HiveServer2 > >> dynamic > >> >> > > service discovery: use persistent ephemeral nodes curator > recipe]. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Thanks, > >> >> > > --Vaibhav > >> >> > > > >> >> > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 9:29 PM, Alan Gates < > ga...@hortonworks.com > >> > >> > >> >> > wrote: > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > I'd really like to get HIVE-8966 in there, since it breaks > >> streaming > >> >> > > > ingest. The patch is ready to go, it's just waiting on a > >> > >> review, > >> > >> >> which > >> >> > > > Owen has promised to do soon. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Alan. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Vikram Dixit K <vikram.di...@gmail.com> < > vikram.di...@gmail.com> > >> >> > > > January 19, 2015 at 18:53 > >> >> > > > Hi All, > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > I am going to be creating the branch 1.0 as mentioned earlier, > >> >> > tomorrow. > >> >> > > I > >> >> > > > have the following list of jiras that I want to get committed > >> > >> to > >> > >> the > >> >> > > branch > >> >> > > > before creating an RC. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > HIVE-9112 > >> >> > > > HIVE-6997 : Delete hive server 1 > >> >> > > > HIVE-8485 > >> >> > > > HIVE-9053 > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Please let me know if you would like me to include any other > >> jiras. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Thanks > >> >> > > > Vikram. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Vikram Dixit K < > >> >> > vikram.di...@gmail.com> > >> >> > > > <vikram.di...@gmail.com> <vikram.di...@gmail.com> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Thejas Nair <the...@hortonworks.com> <the...@hortonworks.com> > >> >> > > > January 1, 2015 at 10:23 > >> >> > > > Yes, 1.0 is a good opportunity to remove some of the deprecated > >> >> > > > components. The change to remove HiveServer1 is already there > >> > >> in > >> > >> >> trunk > >> >> > > > , we should include that. > >> >> > > > We can also use 1.0 release to clarify the public vs private > >> status > >> >> of > >> >> > > > some of the APIs. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Thanks for the reminder about the documentation status of > >> > >> 1.0. I > >> > >> will > >> >> > > > look at some of them. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Lefty Leverenz > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Lefty Leverenz <leftylever...@gmail.com> > >> <leftylever...@gmail.com> > >> >> > > > December 31, 2014 at 0:12 > >> >> > > > Oh, now I get it. The 1.0.0 *branch* of Hive. Okay. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > -- Lefty > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 11:43 PM, Lefty Leverenz < > >> >> > > leftylever...@gmail.com> > >> >> > > > <leftylever...@gmail.com> <leftylever...@gmail.com> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Lefty Leverenz <leftylever...@gmail.com> > >> <leftylever...@gmail.com> > >> >> > > > December 30, 2014 at 23:43 > >> >> > > > I thought x.x.# releases were just for fixups, x.#.x could > >> > >> include > >> > >> >> new > >> >> > > > features, and #.x.x were major releases that might have some > >> >> > > > backward-incompatible changes. But I guess we haven't agreed > >> > >> on > >> > >> that. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > As for documentation, we still have 84 jiras with TODOC14 > >> > >> labels > >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > < > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC14 > >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > < > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC14 > >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > . > >> >> > > > Not to mention 25 TODOC13 labels > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > < > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC13 > >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > < > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC13 > >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > , > >> >> > > > eleven TODOC12 > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > < > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC12 > >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > < > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC12 > >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > , > >> >> > > > seven TODOC11 > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > < > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC11 > >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > < > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC11 > >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > , > >> >> > > > and seven TODOC10 > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > < > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC10 > >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > < > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC10 > >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > . > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > That's 134 doc tasks to finish for a Hive 1.0.0 release -- > >> preferably > >> >> > by > >> >> > > > the release date, not after. Because expectations are higher > >> > >> for > >> > >> >> 1.0.0 > >> >> > > > releases. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > -- Lefty > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Vikram Dixit K < > >> >> > vikram.di...@gmail.com> > >> >> > > > <vikram.di...@gmail.com> <vikram.di...@gmail.com> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Vikram Dixit K <vikram.di...@gmail.com> < > vikram.di...@gmail.com> > >> >> > > > December 30, 2014 at 17:23 > >> >> > > > Hi Folks, > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Given that there have been a number of fixes that have gone > >> > >> into > >> > >> >> branch > >> >> > > > 0.14 in the past 8 weeks, I would like to make a release > >> > >> of > >> 0.14.1 > >> > >> >> > soon. > >> >> > > I > >> >> > > > would like to fix some of the release issues as well this > >> > >> time > >> > >> >> around. > >> >> > I > >> >> > > am > >> >> > > > thinking of some time around 15th January for getting a RC > >> > >> out. > >> > >> >> Please > >> >> > > let > >> >> > > > me know if you have any concerns. Also, from a previous thread, > >> > >> I > >> > >> >> would > >> >> > > > like to make this release the 1.0 branch of hive. The process > >> > >> for > >> > >> >> > getting > >> >> > > > jiras into this release is going to be the same as the previous > >> one > >> >> > viz.: > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > 1. Mark the jira with fix version 0.14.1 and update the status > >> > >> to > >> > >> >> > > > blocker/critical. > >> >> > > > 2. If a committer +1s the patch for 0.14.1, it is good to > >> > >> go in. > >> > >> >> Please > >> >> > > > mention me in the jira in case you are not sure if the jira > >> > >> should > >> > >> >> make > >> >> > > it > >> >> > > > for 0.14.1. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Thanks > >> >> > > > Vikram. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > >> >> > > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual > >> > >> or > >> > >> >> > entity > >> >> > > > to which it is addressed and may contain information that > >> > >> is > >> > >> >> > > confidential, > >> >> > > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. > >> > >> If > >> the > >> > >> >> > reader > >> >> > > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby > >> >> notified > >> >> > > that > >> >> > > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure > >> > >> or > >> > >> >> > > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. > >> > >> If you > >> > >> have > >> >> > > > received this communication in error, please contact the > >> > >> sender > >> > >> >> > > immediately > >> >> > > > and delete it from your system. Thank You. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > -- > >> >> > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > >> >> > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual > >> > >> or > >> > >> >> entity > >> >> > to > >> >> > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is > >> confidential, > >> >> > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If > >> > >> the > >> > >> >> reader > >> >> > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby > >> notified > >> >> > that > >> >> > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure > >> > >> or > >> > >> >> > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you > >> > >> have > >> > >> >> > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender > >> >> > immediately > >> >> > > and delete it from your system. Thank You. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > -- > >> >> > Nothing better than when appreciated for hard work. > >> >> > -Mark > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> > >> >> Thanks, > >> >> Eugene > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > >> >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or > >> entity to > >> >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is > >> > >> confidential, > >> > >> >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the > >> reader > >> >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby > notified > >> that > >> >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or > >> >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > >> >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender > >> immediately > >> >> and delete it from your system. Thank You. > >> >> > >> > >> -- > >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity > >> > >> to > >> > >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, > >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the > reader > >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified > >> > >> that > >> > >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or > >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender > >> > >> immediately > >> > >> and delete it from your system. Thank You. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Nothing better than when appreciated for hard work. > >> -Mark > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity > >> to which it is addressed and may contain information that is > confidential, > >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the > reader > >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified > that > >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or > >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender > immediately > >> and delete it from your system. Thank You. > >> >