[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-22956?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16926539#comment-16926539
]
Peter Somogyi commented on HBASE-22956:
---------------------------------------
{quote}We need a 1.0 branch
{quote}
Why do we need a different branch? I think we can have a tag (rel/1.0.0) for
the release and continue the development on master and release the second
operator-tools release from there. We want to keep backward compatibility with
HBase2 releases so until we don't introduce something that could break
compatibility with earlier HBase 2 releases I don't feel the need to have
multiple branches.
> [HBCK2/hbase-operator-tools] Make first release, 1.0.0
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-22956
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-22956
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: hbck2
> Reporter: stack
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: hbase-operator-tools-1.0.0
>
>
> Make our first release of hbck2/hbase-operator-tools.
> First release should have the coverage hbck1 had at least. When the parent
> for this issue is done, we'll be at hbck1+. Let us release then (week or
> two?).
> A release will help operators who have been struggling having to build hbck2
> against different hbase versions. The release should be a "fat
> jar"/completely contained with all dependency satisfied so operator can just
> fire up hbck2 w/o having to build against an hbase or provide some magic mix
> of jars to satisfy hbck2 tool needs.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.2#803003)
