On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Allen Wittenauer <awittena...@linkedin.com> wrote: > > Let me understand this: > > a) the hbase folks have been required to patch hadoop due to bugs
The branch is to work on adding a feature to 0.20, not for fixing bugs. > c) we finally have momentum on getting 0.21 out the door > d) hey, let's make their life easier and take resources out of 0.21 by > creating a branch > The above is a fallacious setup. How does a branch in 0.20 detract from the 0.21 momentum (The append feature that we'd work on in 0.20 branch has little relation to how append works in 0.21). > Are we willing to create a branch for everyone that asks? What happens if > mahout/lucene/solr/joes-random-application asks? Is it a good idea to create > a branch that hopefully has a very short life time? Is it the latest > fashion amongst the PMC to request random branches? > > trunk > 0.21 > 0.20 > 0.20-append > 0.20-security-sure-hope-this-turns-into-1.0 > 0.20-lifecycle-management-stuff-that-seems-to-never-get-committed > ... > > I'm not PMC, but can I make requests too, since I have to patch what we use? > Of course you can. > I'd rather have the HBase folks put pressure on the Hadoop PMC to get 0.21 > out the door than create a custom-to-be-thrown-away-in-less-than-a-year > branch. This way we *all* benefit rather than a select, but vocal group. We're all behind 0.21. Its the future. St.Ack
