I will try to get them in or bug Daryn. HDFS-8498 doesn't seem a new bug, so I
kicked it out to 2.7.3.
Kihwal
From: Vinod Vavilapalli <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; Kihwal Lee
<[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; Chris Nauroth
<[email protected]>; "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>; "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>; Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli
<[email protected]>; Ming Ma <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: 2.7.2 release plan
I see you already put in both HDFS-8950 and HDFS-7725, so we are good there.
Can you please do a pass on HDFS-8871 and may be help nudge Daryn on HDFS-8893,
HDFS-8674 and HDFS-8498?
Thanks
+Vinod
> On Oct 27, 2015, at 8:12 AM, Kihwal Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I think we need HDFS-8950 and HDFS-7725 in 2.7.2.It should be easy to
> backport/cherry-pick HDFS-7725. For HDFS-8950, it will be nice if Ming can
> chime in.
> Kihwal
>
> From: Tsuyoshi Ozawa <[email protected]>
> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Cc: Chris Nauroth <[email protected]>; "[email protected]"
> <[email protected]>; "[email protected]"
> <[email protected]>; "[email protected]"
> <[email protected]>; Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli
> <[email protected]>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 2:39 AM
> Subject: Re: 2.7.2 release plan
>
> Vinod and Chris,
>
> Thanks for your reply. I'll do also backport not only bug fixes but
> also documentations(I think 2.7.2 includes them). It helps users a lot.
>
> Best,
> - Tsuyoshi
>
> On Tuesday, 27 October 2015, Vinod Vavilapalli <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> +1.
>>
>> Thanks
>> +Vinod
>>
>>> On Jul 16, 2015, at 8:18 AM, Chris Nauroth <[email protected]
>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd be comfortable with inclusion of any doc-only patch in minor
>> releases.
>>> There is a lot of value to end users in pushing documentation fixes as
>>> quickly as possible, and they don't bear the same risk of regressions or
>>> incompatibilities as code changes.
>>>
>>> --Chris Nauroth
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/16/15, 12:38 AM, "Tsuyoshi Ozawa" <[email protected] <javascript:;>>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> thank you for starting the discussion about 2.7.2 release.
>>>>
>>>>> The focus obviously is to have blocker issues [2], bug-fixes and *no*
>>>> features / improvements.
>>>>
>>>> I've committed YARN-3170, which is an improvement of documentation. I
>>>> thought documentation pages which can be fit into branch-2.7 can be
>>>> included easily. Should I revert it?
>>>>
>>>>>> I need help from all committers in automatically
>>>> merging in any patch that fits the above criterion into 2.7.2 instead of
>>>> only on trunk or 2.8.
>>>>
>>>> Sure, I'll try my best.
>>>>
>>>>> That way we can include not only blocker but also critical bug fixes to
>>>>> 2.7.2 release.
>>>>
>>>> As Vinod mentioned, we should also apply major bug fixes into
>> branch-2.7.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> - Tsuyoshi
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Akira AJISAKA
>>>> <[email protected] <javascript:;>> wrote:
>
>
>>>>> Thanks Vinod for starting 2.7.2 release plan.
>>>>>
>>>>>> The focus obviously is to have blocker issues [2], bug-fixes and *no*
>>>>>> features / improvements.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can we adopt the plan as Karthik mentioned in "Additional maintenance
>>>>> releases for Hadoop 2.y versions" thread? That way we can include not
>>>>> only
>>>>> blocker but also critical bug fixes to 2.7.2 release.
>>>>>
>>>>> In addition, branch-2.7 is a special case. (2.7.1 is the first stable
>>>>> release) Therefore I'm thinking we can include major bug fixes as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Akira
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7/16/15 04:13, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks everyone for the push on 2.7.1! Branch-2.7 is now open for
>>>>>> commits
>>>>>> to a 2.7.2 release. JIRA also now has a 2.7.2 version for all the
>>>>>> sub-projects.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Continuing the previous 2.7.1 thread on steady maintenance releases
>>>>>> [1],
>>>>>> we
>>>>>> should follow up 2.7.1 with a 2.7.2 within 4 weeks. Earlier I tried a
>>>>>> 2-3
>>>>>> week cycle for 2.7.1, but it seems to be impractical given the
>>>>>> community
>>>>>> size. So, I propose we target a release by the end for 4 weeks from
>>>>>> now,
>>>>>> starting the release close-down within 2-3 weeks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The focus obviously is to have blocker issues [2], bug-fixes and *no*
>>>>>> features / improvements. I need help from all committers in
>>>>>> automatically
>>>>>> merging in any patch that fits the above criterion into 2.7.2 instead
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> only on trunk or 2.8.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +Vinod
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] A 2.7.1 release to follow up 2.7.0
>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/zwzze6cqqgwq4rmw
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [2] 2.7.2 release blockers:
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12332867
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
