Also, when people +1 a merge, can they please describe if they did testing / use the feature in addition to what is already described in the thread?
On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Vrushali Channapattan < vrushalic2...@gmail.com> wrote: > For timeline service v2, we have completed all subtasks under YARN-5355 > [1]. > > We initiated a merge-to-trunk vote [2] yesterday. > > thanks > Vrushali > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-5355 > [2] > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-common- > dev/201708.mbox/%3CCAE=b_fbLT2J+Ezb4wqdN_UwBiG1Sd5kpqGaw+9Br__zou5yNTQ@ > mail.gmail.com%3E > > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli < > vino...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Agreed. I was very clearly not advocating for rushing in features. If you > > have followed my past emails, I have only strongly advocated features be > > worked in branches and get merged when they are in a reasonable state. > > > > Each branch contributor group should look at their readiness and merge > > stuff in assuming that the branch reached a satisfactory state. That’s > it. > > > > From release management perspective, blocking features just because we > are > > a month close to the deadline is not reasonable. Let the branch > > contributors rationalize, make this decision and the rest of us can > support > > them in making the decision. > > > > +Vinod > > > > > At this point, there have been three planned alphas from September 2016 > > until July 2017 to "get in features". While a couple of upcoming > features > > are "a few weeks" away, I think all of us are aware how predictable > > software development schedules can be. I think we can also all agree > that > > rushing just to meet a release deadline isn't the best practice when it > > comes to software development either. > > > > > > Andrew has been very clear about his goals at each step and I think > > Wangda's willingness to not rush in resource types was an appropriate > > response. I'm sympathetic to the goals of getting in a feature for 3.0, > > but it might be a good idea for each project that is a "few weeks away" > to > > seriously look at the readiness compared to the features which have been > > testing for 6+ months already. > > > > > > -Ray > > > > >
