https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-4487. Please start a new thread next time.
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 12:40 AM, Evert Lammerts <[email protected]>wrote: > I'm sorry for breaking into your discussion as an outsider, but I'm very > curious about the security features you are planning to roll out in March. > Where can I find information about this? > > Best regards, > Evert Lammerts > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jay Booth [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: maandag 22 februari 2010 5:55 > > To: [email protected] > > Cc: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Release plans > > > > Well, since someone has to get the ball rolling as far as release > > masters, I'll nominate Stack and/or someone hbase related for 0.21 > > with the primary goal of being "soon"? They get a big win from append > > and others will gain from the expanded mapreduce lib, better > > schedulers, etc. There are a lot of new features and some major > > changes (project split) already in the 0.21 branch, so IMO it's worth > > considering a release with minimal backports, rather than make binding > > decisions about 0.22 before 0.21 is even in the wild. > > > > -Jay > > > > PS sorry Stack > > > > On Feb 20, 2010, at 5:04 PM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Eli Collins <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >> Can we make a decision on basing 21 on the current branch and if > > it's > > >> decided that 22 can't remove stuff that was in 20 we'll go back and > > >> do > > >> the necessary additions on 21 and trunk? Suspect that decision will > > >> take a lot more back and forth, but needs to conclude before 21 is > > >> released. > > >> > > > > > > Lets. > > > > > > Regards 0.21/current-branch release, as has been suggested above, > > > first we need to figure the release master. No release master, no > > > release. If we have a release master, then I suggest we vote on > > > current branch being released as 0.21 as soon as the blockers are > > > cleared. > > > > > > I don't think we need muddy the above vote with whether or not 0.21 > > > maintains API combatibility with 0.20. IMO, it must (because Y! want > > > to have the 0.20 API in place when January 2011 rolls around). This > > > makes 0.21 a "minor" release -- something we've not done before (For > > > the record, I also had a misunderstanding that what we were doing up > > > to this was major and patch only). So, part of the release process > > > would involve ensuring no removed deprecations, etc. > > > > > > As DC has been saying, this requirement that releases between now and > > > January 2011 not change APIs makes 0.20 retroactively into a "major" > > > release. 0.20 is the release where major shifted left in our > > > versioning scheme and minor releases came into play. 0.21 and 0.22 > > > will be minor releases. Can we just acknowledge this fact, that there > > > was a step at version 0.20, update the wiki around versioning -- its > > > currently wrong anyways as Elis' points out -- and just move on? > > > Going back and calling 0.20 a 1.0 seems more apt to create confusion > > > and besides, I'm with Allen that hadoop 1.0 needs wire compatibility > > > before the 1.0 can roll around. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > St.Ack > > > P.S. +1 on branching as soon as avro and security are in, etc. >
