Arun, Suresh, Very exciting to hear about this final push to stable Hadoop 2. But I have a problem. Either with the plan or with the version number. I'll be arguing for the number change below rather than the plan.
1. Based on features listed by Suresh it looks that you plan a heavy feature-full release. 2. You are saying you want to complete this within a month (or so). 3. You would like to give it beta quality mark. Not saying it is impossible. But in line with the common saying "You can have fast, good or big: pick two" (a little rephrasing here) I would like to propose to leave some gap between 2.0.4 and the next version so that just in case there was a version to put bug fixes on top of the last release. Do you think we can call the version you proposed to release 2.1.0 or 2.1.0-beta? The proposed new features imho do not exactly conform with the idea of dot-dot release, but definitely qualify for a major number change. I am just trying to avoid rather ugly 2.0.4.1 versions, which of course also possible. Thanks, --Konstantin On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Suresh Srinivas <sur...@hortonworks.com>wrote: > Thanks for starting this discussion. I volunteer to do a final review of > protocol changes, so we can avoid incompatible changes to API and wire > protocol post 2.0.5 in Common and HDFS. > > We have been working really hard on the following features. I would like to > get into 2.x and see it reach HDFS users: > # Snapshots > # NFS gateway for HDFS > # HDFS-347 unix domain socket based short circuits > # Windows support > > Other HDFS folks please let me know if I missed anything. > > To ensure a timely release of 2.0.5-beta, we should not hold back for > individual features. However, I would like to make necessary API and/or > protocol changes right-away. This will allow us to adding features in > subsequent releases e.g. hadoop-2.2 or hadoop-2.3 etc without breaking > compatibility. For e.g. even if we don't complete NFS support, making > FileID related changes in 2.0.5-beta will ensure future compatbility. > > Regards, > Suresh > > > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Arun C Murthy <a...@hortonworks.com> > wrote: > > > Gang, > > > > With hadoop-2.0.4-alpha released, I'd like 2.0.4 to be the final of our > > hadoop-2.x alphas. We have made lots of progress on hadoop-2.x and I > > believe we are nearly there, exciting times! > > > > As we have discussed previously, I hope to do a final push to stabilize > > hadoop-2.x, release a hadoop-2.0.5-beta in the next month or so; and then > > declare hadoop-2.1 as stable this summer after a short period of > intensive > > testing. > > > > With that in mind, I really want to make a serious push to lock down > APIs > > and wire-protocols for hadoop-2.0.5-beta. Thus, we can confidently > support > > hadoop-2.x in a compatible manner in the future. So, it's fine to add new > > features, but please ensure that all APIs are frozen for > hadoop-2.0.5-beta > > > > Vinod is helping out on the YARN/MR side and has tagged a number of > final > > changes (including some the final API incompatibilities) we'd like to > push > > in before we call hadoop-2.x as ready to be supported (Target Version set > > to 2.0.5-beta): > > http://s.apache.org/target-hadoop-2.0.5-beta > > Thanks Vinod! (Note some of the sub-tasks of umbrella jiras may not be > > tagged, but their necessity is implied). > > > > Similarly on HDFS side, can someone please help out by tagging features, > > bug-fixes, protocol/API changes etc.? This way we can ensure HDFS APIs & > > protocols are locked down too - I'd really appreciate it! > > > > thanks, > > Arun > > > > > > -- > > Arun C. Murthy > > Hortonworks Inc. > > http://hortonworks.com/ > > > > > > > > > -- > http://hortonworks.com/download/ >
