Andrew Wang wrote:
> This means I'll cut branch-3 and > branch-3.0, and move trunk to 4.0.0 before these VOTEs end. This will open > up development for Hadoop 3.1.0 and 4.0.0. I can see a need for branch-3.0, but please do not create branch-3. Doing so will relegate trunk back to the "patch purgatory" branch, a place where patches won't see a release for years. Unless something is imminently going in that will break backwards compatibility and warrant a new 4.x release, I don't see the need to distinguish trunk from the 3.x line. Leaving trunk as the 3.x line means less branches to commit patches through and more testing of every patch since trunk would remain an active area for testing and releasing. If we separate trunk and branch-3 then it's almost certain only-trunk patches will start to accumulate and never get any "real" testing until someone eventually decides it's time to go to Hadoop 4.x. Looking back at trunk-as-3.x for an example, patches committed there in the early days after branch-2 was cut didn't see a release for almost 6 years. My apologies if I've missed a feature that is just going to miss the 3.0 release and will break compatibility when it goes in. If so then we need to cut branch-3, but if not then here's my plea to hold off until we do need it. Jason On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Andrew Wang <andrew.w...@cloudera.com> wrote: > Glad to see the discussion continued in my absence :) > > From a release management perspective, it's *extremely* reasonable to block > the inclusion of new features a month from the planned release date. A > typical software development lifecycle includes weeks of feature freeze and > weeks of code freeze. It is no knock on any developer or any feature to say > that we should not include something in 3.0.0. > > I've been very open and clear about the goals, schedule, and scope of 3.0.0 > over the last year plus. The point of the extended alpha process was to get > all our features in during alpha, and the alpha merge window has been open > for a year. I'm unmoved by arguments about how long a feature has been > worked on. None of these were not part of the original 3.0.0 scope, and our > users have been waiting even longer for big-ticket 3.0 items like JDK8 and > HDFS EC that were part of the discussed scope. > > I see that two VOTEs have gone out since I was out. I still plan to follow > the proposal in my original email. This means I'll cut branch-3 and > branch-3.0, and move trunk to 4.0.0 before these VOTEs end. This will open > up development for Hadoop 3.1.0 and 4.0.0. > > I'm reaching out to the lead contributor of each of these features > individually to discuss. We need to close on this quickly, and email is too > low bandwidth at this stage. > > Best, > Andrew >
