Wow! Great compilation, Milind! Very nice to have the sequence of events handy.
Thanks, Cos On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 23:55, Milind Bhandarkar <mbhandar...@linkedin.com> wrote: > [I am not on PMC, but seeing that PMC may be busy with other issues, I > will try to answer your questions.] > > Eric, > > I think the thread > "http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201101.mbox/%3C18C > 5c999-4680-4684-bc55-a430c40fd...@yahoo-inc.com%3E" will answer your > questions. Here is the timeline as I see it: > > 1. Arun proposes to create a release from the security patchset. Says Doug > has proposed this earlier > (http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201004.mbox/%3C4BD > 1dfea.5020...@apache.org%3E April 23, 2010) ("This has been proposed > earlier by Doug and did not get far due to concerns about the effect this > would have on development on trunk.") (August 24, 2010) > > 2. Lots of +1s, between August 24 to August 30 2010. One particular > comment is from Tom White: "I think it would be good to have a shared 0.20 > Apache security branch. > Since security isn't in 0.21, and the 0.22 release is a some way off > as you mention, this would be useful for folks who want the security > features sooner (and want to use an Apache release)." > > 3. Arun volunteers to create a release (August 30, 2010) > > 4. Doug reminds Arun. (October 15, 2010) > > 5. Arun apologizes for not creating a branch because he was busy, because > he had a baby. (January 11, 2011) > > 6. Lots of discussion about what to call it (the release, not the baby, > although I had a good laugh at Patrick Angeles's email: "You're gonna call > your kid 20.100?" ;-). > > 7. Arun proposes to call it 0.20.100: "I'm open to suggestions - how about > something like 20.100 to show that it's a big jump? Anything else?" Jan > 12, 2011 > > 8. Among others, Eli says: "+1 on 0.20.x (where x is a J > 3)" on Jan > 12, 2011. > > So, as you can see, even if this release is called 0.20.x, the community > agreed that these are valuable patches to have, and despite backward > incompatibility, still have them in minor release. > > - milind > > -- > Milind Bhandarkar > mbhandar...@linkedin.com > +1-650-776-3167 > > > > > > > On 5/6/11 11:14 PM, "Eric Sammer" <esam...@cloudera.com> wrote: > >>On May 6, 2011, at 4:53 AM, Steve Loughran <ste...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>I understand Eli's concerns that putting stuff in there that hasn't gone >>into trunk yet is danger. However, as the team makes no guarantees of 100% >>compatibility between releases, I don't think it's critical. It's just >>something that needs to be addressed -which can be done after this release >>has shipped. >> >> >>I was under the impression that the community has been extremely strict >>about compatibility between minor version bumps in the past. I though >>there >>were specific guarantees and that was one of the reasons certain behaviors >>have persisted so long. >> >>Does this mean API changes can be made in minor releases and it can be >>made >>backward compatible in future releases? That seems very, very counter to >>various conversations that have happened in the past. I'm of the mind that >>we should continue to promise what we've always promised and if that's >>changing, let's make with the refactoring party! >> >>Can some PMC'ers clarify this one for me? >> >>TIA. >>Sammer >> >> >> >>-Steve > >
