Re: [DISCUSS] Switch to GitHub issues after trial

Is your concern significant enough to oppose the proposed action from Mike Walch? On Thu, Mar 1, 2018, 19:56 Mike Drob wrote: > My only concern is of the sort that contributors will be expected to have > different workflows based on what they are working on. > > On Thu, Mar

Re: [DISCUSS] status of Hadoop 3 for 1.9.0 release

Yeah, if Hadoop has changed their stance, propagating a "use as your own risk" would be sufficient from our end. On 3/1/18 6:06 PM, Christopher wrote: If there's a risk, I'd suggest calling things out as "experimental" in the release notes, and encourage users to try it and give us feedback.

Re: [DISCUSS] Switch to GitHub issues after trial

My only concern is of the sort that contributors will be expected to have different workflows based on what they are working on. On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 11:41 AM, Mike Walch wrote: > I would like to start up this discussion again. I don't think we have > reached consensus on

Re: [DISCUSS] status of Hadoop 3 for 1.9.0 release

If there's a risk, I'd suggest calling things out as "experimental" in the release notes, and encourage users to try it and give us feedback. On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 5:10 PM Sean Busbey wrote: > hi folks! > > While reviewing things in prep for getting our master branch over to

Re: [DISCUSS] Switch to GitHub issues after trial

> You're planning to document how GitHub tech would be used to make releases on these repositories? And, we're in agreement that JIRA would not be used at all for these repositories? I think these repos are simple but I am happy to document any GH issues workflows that are unclear to

[DISCUSS] status of Hadoop 3 for 1.9.0 release

hi folks! While reviewing things in prep for getting our master branch over to apache hadoop 3 only (see related discussion [1]), I noticed some wording on the last RC[2] for Hadoop 3.0.1: > Please note: > * HDFS-12990. Change default NameNode RPC port back to 8020. It makes > incompatible

Re: [DISCUSS] Switch to GitHub issues after trial

After the rest of the discussion, I feel like I need to be explicit (so, I'm sorry if I'm being pedantic and we're already in agreement here): You're planning to document how GitHub tech would be used to make releases on these repositories? And, we're in agreement that JIRA would not be used

Re: [DISCUSS] Switch to GitHub issues after trial

I would like to start up this discussion again. I don't think we have reached consensus on moving the primary Accumulo repo to GitHub issues. The primary repo has common workflows (i.e creating issues that affect multiple versions) that don't easily transition to GitHub issues. I have heard