This is a long standing issue with branch-0.22 - are either of you planning
on fixing this?
I personally do not have plans to fix security in .22. I don't think
we should target it. I hope 0.23 will be a replacement for it by
summer. Is it still in your roadmap, Arun?
I also don't think that
Sanjay,
Yes I plan to continue fixing bugs as long as I use the branch, and
release it if the need arise. I hope there won't be many required with
0.23 progressing as planned.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 4:24 PM, sanjay Radia san...@hortonworks.com wrote:
On Mar 19, 2012, at
Arun,
how do you plan to count the vote on this?
Could you please publish the formula.
Thanks,
--Konst
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename
Lots of good stuff on this thread. Todd, Chris and Todd have made great
points. (+1)
Doug, I think you have misdiagnosed the problem (in your comment below). IMO
the problem at the time of the creation of the 0.20.2xx was that the Hadoop
community had not produced a stable release for
Konst,
Please links Nic sent out - essentially STV with a single winner becomes IRV:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
A helpful flowchart:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IRV_counting_flowchart.1.png
Btw, thanks for the links Nic!
Arun
On Mar 19, 2012, at 11:34 PM,
3, 2, 1, 4, 5 (non-binding)
Mark
On 3/19/12 8:06 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a
hole.
(3) Rename
3, 2, 1, 4, 5 (non-binding)
John George
-Original Message-
From: Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com
Reply-To: general@hadoop.apache.org general@hadoop.apache.org
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 20:06:41 -0500
To: general@hadoop.apache.org general@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Rename hadoop
3, 2, 1, 4, 5 (non-binding)
Tom
On 3/19/12 8:06 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a hole.
(3) Rename
3,4,2,1,5
--Bobby Evans
On 3/19/12 8:06 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a hole.
(3) Rename branch-0.23 to
1,3,4,2,5 (non-binding)
3,2,1,4,5 (non-binding)
Nathan
On 3/19/12 8:06 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a hole.
(3) Rename
3,2,1,4,5 (non-binding)
Dave
On 3/19/12 8:06 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a hole.
(3) Rename branch-0.23
3 1 4 2 5 (non-binding)
Daryn
On Mar 19, 2012, at 8:06 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a hole.
(3) Rename branch-0.23 to
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 11:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
Feature freeze has been broken so many times for the .20 branch, so
that it became a norm for the entire project rather than an exception,
which we had in the past.
I agree we should be stricter about what
My vote is:
3 2 1 5 4. (binding)
Thanks,
Enis
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Daryn Sharp da...@yahoo-inc.com wrote:
3 1 4 2 5 (non-binding)
Daryn
On Mar 19, 2012, at 8:06 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename
On 3/19/12 3:38 PM, Todd Lipcon t...@cloudera.com wrote:
So a related policy we might add
to prevent such situations in the future might be that if you backport
something from branch n to n-2 then you ought to also be required to
backport it to branch n-1 and in general to all intervening
My vote is:
3 4 2 1 5 (non-binding)
Regards,
-James
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is
On 3/19/12 11:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
Doug
to prevent such situations in the future might be that if you backport
something from branch n to n-2 then you ought to also be required to
backport it to branch n-1 and in general to all intervening branches.
This is
My vote: 3,2,1,4,5 (non-binding).
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a hole.
(3)
My non-binding vote is 3, 2, 1, 5
Amol.
-Original Message-
From: Arun C Murthy [mailto:a...@hortonworks.com]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 6:07 PM
To: general@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Rename hadoop branches post hadoop-1.x
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename
My vote : 3 4 1
-Giri
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a hole.
(3) Rename
4,2,3
Patrick
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a hole.
(3) Rename branch-0.23
1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
Doug
On 03/19/2012 06:06 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a hole.
(3) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-2, keep
My binding vote is:
4, 3, 2, 1, 5
On Mar 19, 2012, at 6:06 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a hole.
(3) Rename branch-0.23 to
My vote is:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a
hole.
(4) If security is fixed in branch-0.22 within a short time-frame i.e. 2
months then we get option 1, else we get option 3. Effectively
My (non-binding) vote is: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
- milind
On Mar 19, 2012, at 6:06 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a
hole.
(3) Rename
My vote is (3).
-dhruba
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 3:15 PM, milind.bhandar...@emc.com wrote:
My (non-binding) vote is: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
- milind
On Mar 19, 2012, at 6:06 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to
3,4,2,1,5 (non-binding)
Kumar
1,2,3,4,5 (non binding)
Thanks,
Mayank
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Palaniappan, Kumar
kumar.palaniap...@netapp.com wrote:
3,4,2,1,5 (non-binding)
Kumar
1,2,3,4,5 (non binding)
Promoting 21 and 23 as major releases is great, but what's the point of leaving
no space for 22 as a possible major release?
Joep
On Mar 19, 2012, at 6:06 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to
My vote 2 3 1 4 5
Thanks
Amareshwari
On 3/20/12 6:36 AM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a hole.
(3) Rename
my binding vote:
3 1 2 4 5
sharad
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:43 AM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
We've discussed several options:
(1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3.
(2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a
hole.
32 matches
Mail list logo
