Seems related to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-1731.
1.0.1-SNAPSHOT did not contain
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-13109. The current one does,
which requires another change since the method signature is different
between 0.98 patch and 1.0 patch.
I have pushed an add
Sounds like a plan. I changed the pom and MetaDataProtocol version to
4.4.0 on master, so we're all set there.
If you could look at why our master build is failing, that'd be good.
Looks like the 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT build is messed up. We're getting this
exception for every unit test:
Caused by: java.
Ok great. I'll continue with the plan then. I'll send an update again for
devs to notify about the end state as not every one might be following
closely.
Enis
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:13 PM, James Taylor
wrote:
> We can actually just set the pom version and version in MetaDataProtocol
> to 4.
We can actually just set the pom version and version in MetaDataProtocol to
4.4.0 now if we want.
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015, James Taylor wrote:
> True, good point. We can revert those right after we branch in prep for a
> 4.4 release on 1.0.
>
> On Tuesday, March 24, 2015, Enis Söztutar > wro
True, good point. We can revert those right after we branch in prep for a
4.4 release on 1.0.
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015, Enis Söztutar wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:02 PM, James Taylor > wrote:
>
>> The master branch already includes PHOENIX-1642, so we just keep it
>> there. No need
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:02 PM, James Taylor
wrote:
> The master branch already includes PHOENIX-1642, so we just keep it
> there. No need to revert anything or cherry-pick anything. Every
> commit being done to 4.x-HBase-1.x is being done for master (that's
> why it's just wasted overhead unt
The master branch already includes PHOENIX-1642, so we just keep it
there. No need to revert anything or cherry-pick anything. Every
commit being done to 4.x-HBase-1.x is being done for master (that's
why it's just wasted overhead until it's needed).
Your plan sounds fine, except this step isn't
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 5:09 PM, James Taylor
wrote:
> I'm fine with a 4.4 release for HBase 1.0, but it depends on demand -
> do our users need this?
I think so. HBase-1.0 usage is picking up, and we already saw users asking
for it. Though as usual, everything depends on whether there is enoug
I'm fine with a 4.4 release for HBase 1.0, but it depends on demand -
do our users need this? I think doing that out of master will work and
we can create a branch for the release like we do with our other
releases.
When sub tasks of PHOENIX-1501 are ready, I think we'd want to put
those in master
>
>
> We've been putting stuff on feature branches that need more time. When
> PHOENIX-1681 or other sub tasks of PHOENIX-1501 are ready (after
> HBASE-12972 is in), we'll need a branch specific to HBase 1.1. Until
> then, I think it's just unneeded overhead.
>
That is why the branch for 1.1 is no
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Enis Söztutar wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:37 AM, James Taylor
> wrote:
>>
>> Also, Jenkins build on both master and 4.x-HBase-1.x are failing.
>
>
> Thanks, I'll take a look. The tests ran on my node, but seems some weird
> compilation issue. Maybe due t
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:37 AM, James Taylor
wrote:
> Also, Jenkins build on both master and 4.x-HBase-1.x are failing.
>
Thanks, I'll take a look. The tests ran on my node, but seems some weird
compilation issue. Maybe due to depending on the SNAPSHOT artifact.
>
> On Tuesday, March 24, 201
Also, Jenkins build on both master and 4.x-HBase-1.x are failing.
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015, James Taylor wrote:
> The 4.x-HBase-1.x branch is identical to master. How about we release out
> of master until the branches diverge. No need to keep two identical
> branches in sync. It's just overhe
The 4.x-HBase-1.x branch is identical to master. How about we release out
of master until the branches diverge. No need to keep two identical
branches in sync. It's just overhead, unless I'm missing something?
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015, Enis Söztutar wrote:
> You mean get rid of 4.x-HBase-1.x b
You mean get rid of 4.x-HBase-1.x branch? It is already created and has
PHOENIX-1642. It builds with HBase-1.0, but not 1.1.
Enis
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 12:33 PM, James Taylor
wrote:
> I think we can stick with just 4.x-HBase-0.98 and master branch for
> now until we need to work simultaneousl
Just FYI, I've reopened the issue that introduced the RegionScanner changes
for more discussion.
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 4:53 PM, James Taylor
wrote:
> Is this fixed yet? If not, would it be possible for you to set the pom
> to HBase-1.0.1 instead so that master will build? Just don't want to
>
I think we can stick with just 4.x-HBase-0.98 and master branch for
now until we need to work simultaneously on a Phoenix release that
supports both HBase 1.0 and HBase 1.1. Seems like the earliest would
be closer to an HBase 1.1 release. Any idea when that might be?
Otherwise, the overhead of keep
Ah, got it. Thanks, Enis!
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Enis Söztutar wrote:
> The pom is pointing to 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT. Jenkins build was fine yesterday. I
> tested locally with 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT.
>
> See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-1763.
>
> Enis
>
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 4:53
The pom is pointing to 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT. Jenkins build was fine yesterday. I
tested locally with 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT.
See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-1763.
Enis
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 4:53 PM, James Taylor
wrote:
> Is this fixed yet? If not, would it be possible for you to set the
Is this fixed yet? If not, would it be possible for you to set the pom
to HBase-1.0.1 instead so that master will build? Just don't want to
leave it in a broken state.
Thanks,
James
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:31 PM, Enis Söztutar wrote:
> About the 4.x-HBase-1.x branch, it seems that I have spoken
About the 4.x-HBase-1.x branch, it seems that I have spoken too soon.
Current branch head does not compile with latest HBase-1.1.0-SNAPSHOT:
It seems the RegionScanner changes are the problem. Let me look into how we
can resolve those for future compatibility.
Enis
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 2:15 P
Hi,
As per private PMC threads and the dev discussions [1], I have created two
new branches for 4.x development for supporting both HBase-0.98 and
HBase-1.0 versions. The goal is to have 4.4.0 and 4.5.0, etc releases which
support both of the HBase versions and possibly HBase-1.1.0+ as well.
See
22 matches
Mail list logo
