yarn 2.2, not yarn 0.22, I am so sorry.
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Azuryy Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > Spark-0.8.1 supports yarn 0.22 right? where to find the release note? > Thanks. > > > On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 3:20 AM, Henry Saputra <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Yeah seems like it. He was ok with our prev release. >> Let's wait for his reply >> >> On Saturday, December 14, 2013, Patrick Wendell wrote: >> >> > Henry - from that thread it looks like sebb's concern was something >> > different than this. >> > >> > On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Henry Saputra < >> [email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > > Hi Patrick, >> > > >> > > Yeap I agree, but technically ASF VOTE release on source only, there >> > > even debate about it =), so putting it in the vote staging artifact >> > > could confuse people because in our case we do package 3rd party >> > > libraries in the binary jars. >> > > >> > > I have sent email to sebb asking clarification about his concern in >> > > general@ list. >> > > >> > > - Henry >> > > >> > > On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Patrick Wendell <[email protected] >> > >> > wrote: >> > >> Hey Henry, >> > >> >> > >> One thing a lot of people do during the vote is test the binaries and >> > >> make sure they work. This is really valuable. If you'd like I could >> > >> add a caveat to the vote thread explaining that we are only voting on >> > >> the source. >> > >> >> > >> - Patrick >> > >> >> > >> On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Henry Saputra < >> > [email protected]> wrote: >> > >>> Actually we should be fine putting the binaries there as long as the >> > >>> VOTE is for the source. >> > >>> >> > >>> Let's verify with sebb in the general@ list about his concern. >> > >>> >> > >>> - Henry >> > >>> >> > >>> On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Henry Saputra < >> > [email protected]> wrote: >> > >>>> Hi Patrick, as sebb has mentioned let's move the binaries from the >> > >>>> voting directory in your people.apache.org directory. >> > >>>> ASF release voting is for source code and not binaries, and >> > >>>> technically we provide binaries for convenience. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> And add link to the KEYS location in the dist[1] to let verify >> > signatures. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> Sorry for the late response to the VOTE thread, guys. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> - Henry >> > >>>> >> > >>>> [1] >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/spark/KEYS >> > >>>> >> > >>>> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Patrick Wendell < >> [email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >>>>> The vote is now closed. This vote passes with 5 PPMC +1's and no 0 >> > or -1 >> > >>>>> votes. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> +1 (5 Total) >> > >>>>> Matei Zaharia* >> > >>>>> Nick Pentreath* >> > >>>>> Patrick Wendell* >> > >>>>> Prashant Sharma* >> > >>>>> Tom Graves* >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> 0 (0 Total) >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> -1 (0 Total) >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> * = Binding Vote >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> As per the incubator release guide [1] I'll be sending this to the >> > >>>>> general incubator list for a final vote from IPMC members. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> [1] >> > >>>>> >> > >> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-incubator-release- >> > >>>>> vote >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Evan Chan <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>>> I'd be personally fine with a standard workflow of assemble-deps >> + >> > >>>>>> packaging just the Spark files as separate packages, if it >> speeds up >> > >>>>>> everyone's development time. >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Mark Hamstra < >> > [email protected] >> > >>>>>> >wrote: >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> > I don't know how to make sense of the numbers, but here's what >> > I've got >> > >>>>>> > from a very small sample size. >> > >
