Hi all,
I am very glad to announce that Chen Liang was voted to join Apache Hadoop
PMC.
Congratulations Chen! Well deserved and thank you for your dedication to
the project.
Cheers,
--Konstantin
Hi all,
I am very glad to announce that Erik Krogen was voted by Hadoop PMC as a
Hadoop committer.
Please join me to congratulate Erik with this well deserved status!
Thanks,
--Konstantin
Hi all,
I am very glad to announce that Jonathan Hung was voted by the PMC as a
Hadoop committer.
Please join me to congratulate Jonathan with this well deserved status!
Thanks,
--Konstantin
Hi everybody,
I am glad to announce that Apache Hadoop 2.7.6 has been released. Apache
Hadoop 2.7.6 is now available for download from Apache distribution
repository
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/hadoop/common/hadoop-2.7.6/
and from Apache mirrors.
For download instructions please
Hi everybody,
I am glad to announce that Apache Hadoop 2.7.5 has been released. Apache
Hadoop 2.7.5 is now available for download from Apache distribution
repository
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/hadoop/common/hadoop-2.7.5/
and from Apache mirrors.
For download instructions please
have had such experience.
A clarification on categorizing this action and on voting practices
from ASF may help.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.comwrote:
Arun,
I am glad I at least convinced you to finally announce your release
, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.comwrote:
Sounds like you are having fun, Arun.
2.0.5 is explicitly in the subject line for this vote.
No worries I'll fix that.
You should stop assuming - it's in nobody interests - and start reading.
--Konst
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 11
metaphors
like junkyard and dumping ground sound a little hysterical,
frankly). Once 2.x reaches beta, we should probably explore rolling
new alpha releases to ensure it doesn't rot.
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
You keep twisting around
This vote passes with
6 binding +1s
4 non-binding +1
4 binding -1
3 non-binding -1
Thank you for voting,
--Konstantin
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.comwrote:
Please vote on the following plan for Hadoop release 2.0.5
- bug fixes encountered in current
.).
I'll do the 2.1 series by renaming the planned 2.0.5 to 2.1.
thanks,
Arun
On May 14, 2013, at 10:07 AM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
This vote passes with
6 binding +1s
4 non-binding +1
4 binding -1
3 non-binding -1
Thank you for voting,
--Konstantin
On Wed, May 1, 2013
, at 11:04 AM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
I can point you towards a set of fixes I think important for YARN
(nodemanager, security etc.).
That would be very much appreciated.
I'll do the 2.1 series by renaming the planned 2.0.5 to 2.1.
Thanks.
Thanks. I've copied branch-2.0.4
mis-counted stevel, whose vote is binding.
On May 14, 2013, at 10:07 AM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
This vote passes with
6 binding +1s
4 non-binding +1
4 binding -1
3 non-binding -1
Thank you for voting,
--Konstantin
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
Steve,
2.0.4-alpha is released.
--Konst
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Steve Loughran steve.lough...@gmail.comwrote:
On 14 May 2013 11:52, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
Sounds like you are having fun, Arun.
2.0.5 is explicitly in the subject line for this vote
is a feature or a bug needs to be negotiated with the
RM *when in doubt*.
Thanks,
+Vinod
On May 14, 2013, at 11:52 AM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
Sounds like you are having fun, Arun.
2.0.5 is explicitly in the subject line for this vote.
No worries I'll fix that.
You should stop
wrote:
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 11:14 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
Not everybody who is voting now provided context in the discussion thread.
You did. And I am sorry I did not understand it.
I'll try to be clearer.
It's unnecessary for you to ask permission to roll
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Chris Douglas cdoug...@apache.org wrote:
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
This is the voting thread, not the discussion one.
The discussion was going on the dev thread.
[...]
Oh. And it would be good to have
, but we should clarify that.
On May 1, 2013, at 12:53 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
Please vote on the following plan for Hadoop release 2.0.5
- bug fixes encountered in current release 2.0.4-alpha
- make all API changes to allow freezing them post 2.0.5
- no new features
this (binding).
Could you please consider my vote or should I start a new one to unroll
this?
thanks,
Arun
On May 8, 2013, at 10:40 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
My formal +1.
Vote passes with
3 binding +1s
1 non-binding +1
1 binding -1
1 non-binding -1
and one
Shvachko wrote:
My formal +1.
Vote passes with
3 binding +1s
1 non-binding +1
1 binding -1
1 non-binding -1
and one (Steve's) vote which I couldn't categorize: 1 (non-binding)
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
My formal +1.
Vote passes with
3 binding +1s
1 non-binding +1
1 binding -1
1 non-binding -1
and one (Steve's) vote which I couldn't categorize: 1 (non-binding)
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.comwrote:
Please vote on the following
Please vote on the following plan for Hadoop release 2.0.5
- bug fixes encountered in current release 2.0.4-alpha
- make all API changes to allow freezing them post 2.0.5
- no new features
As discussed on @dev thread
http://s.apache.org/fs
this will allow to stabilize 2.0 branch in a short and
, but I really don't
know. It depends on how fast 2.0 becomes stable.
--Bobby
I hope that moving 0.23 to stable will accelerate stabilization of branch 2.
Thanks,
Konstantin
On 4/24/13 10:17 PM, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everybody,
There was and is a number
...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
There was and is a number of discussions about Hadoop version
compatibility, feature porting, stability. I think that many problems of
Hadoop are the result of our flawed release processes
Hi everybody,
There was and is a number of discussions about Hadoop version
compatibility, feature porting, stability. I think that many problems of
Hadoop are the result of our flawed release processes and can be solved by
streamlining the releases.
It is a fact that current trunk turned into
Hi Bobby,
This is personal email, not on general.
I was wondering where did the hadoop-auth.jar go in that last release?
Couldn't find it in the binary distro.
I might missed something so will appreciate your comments.
Thanks,
--Konst
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Robert Evans
Hi Matt,
Could you please explain what is the difference between Hadoop 1.0.4
just accepted and Hadoop 1.1.0 being
voted at the same time? Also why is it important to keep and release
both of these branches?
I am lost here. I assume other people might have that question in mind as well.
Thanks,
I verified checksums, untared, built and ran common tests. Looking good.
+1
Bobby, you need to generate releasenotes.html, which does not include
changes for 0.23.2 and 0.23.3
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Bobby Evans bo...@apache.org wrote:
I have built an RC0 for
was in the release twiki and I don't see any step for that
part.
http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePostMavenization
I'll update the wiki with it. So I don't forget next time.
--Bobby
On 9/14/12 2:32 AM, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
I verified checksums, untared, built and ran
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
OK I lied and said I wouldn't reply :)
Long thread. I just picked a random Chris's (as the initiator) email to reply.
Chris,
You are basically saying there's been a history of community problems
in
+1
Makes sense.
My rational is that since Any committer may serve as the manager of a release
http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html#release_manager
then any committer needs access to the whole tree.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 9:20 PM, Eli Collins e...@cloudera.com
1, 2, 5
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 branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a hole.
(3) Rename
---
Milind Bhandarkar
Chief Architect, Greenplum Labs, Data Computing Division, EMC
+1-650-523-3858 (W)
+1-408-666-8483 (M)
On 3/19/12 12:04 PM, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
Hadoop naming is definitely confusing. And having Hadoop-1 did not
make it less confusing for users
, at 12:04 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
Current 0.22 - Gets renamed to 1.5 (if it ever gets tested and released)
It was released on November 29, 2011.
eBay is actively using it as of today.
Konstantine,
For a release to be truly viable, it has to be deployed in production and
followed
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
Hadoop naming is definitely confusing. And having Hadoop-1 did not
make it less confusing for users.
Current 0.22 - Gets renamed to 1.5 (if it ever gets tested and released)
It was released on November 29, 2011.
eBay is actively using it as of today.
If the goal of renaming branches is to make
thread but does this become 2.0 then?
Tom
On 12/12/11 2:33 PM, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
On December 10, 2011 Hadoop PMC voted to release Hadoop 0.22.0
See http://s.apache.org/COC
The release have been brewing for one year.
It incorporates over 700 jiras fixed since
PM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.comwrote:
On December 10, 2011 Hadoop PMC voted to release Hadoop 0.22.0
See http://s.apache.org/COC
The release have been brewing for one year.
It incorporates over 700 jiras fixed since the release of 0.21.0.
It is good to have it finalized
On December 10, 2011 Hadoop PMC voted to release Hadoop 0.22.0
See http://s.apache.org/COC
The release have been brewing for one year.
It incorporates over 700 jiras fixed since the release of 0.21.0.
It is good to have it finalized.
Please note that 0.22.0 release does not support security.
For
With 5 binding +1s (including me), 8 non-binding +1s, and an extra +1
based on Bigtop testing
the vote passes.
Thank you everybody for voting and evaluating the release.
--Konstantin
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 2:47 AM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
I created a release candidate
Owen,
Could you please clarify. Do you mean the vote should ran 3 more days
or can be closed now?
As mentioned earlier the file hadoop-0.22.0.tar.gz was regenerated
last Saturday due to a trivial change in the packaging script. The
Hadoop sources in it remained unchanged.
Please advise.
Thanks,
Ok. The vote will run till Saturday.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Owen O'Malley o...@hortonworks.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
Owen,
Could you please clarify. Do you mean the vote should ran 3 more days
Yes, you are right, according to Hadoop bylaws.
http://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html#Decision+Making
--Konstantin
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok. The vote will run
Given, the 'feature' regressions in MR (security, operability etc. -
http://s.apache.org/critical-0.22.0), I propose we mark hadoop-0.22.0 as
'alpha' quality too with necessary statutory warnings to end users to alert
them to the differences in terms of missing features. Else, we could land
is turned off in this release.
LinuxTaskController has been removed.
I don't know what you mean by compatibility with 1.0.
--Konstantin
---
E14 - typing on glass
On Dec 2, 2011, at 1:15 AM, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a well tested state of the branch, which imo worth
, 2011 at 2:47 AM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
I created a release candidate for hadoop-0.22.0 available for review at:
http://people.apache.org/~shv/hadoop-0.22.0-rc0/
Pulled this RC into Bigtop and certified the following stack:
Hadoop 0.22
HBase 0.92
Zookeeper
Arun,
This was not intended to criticize 0.23 release.
I am merely referring to its alpha status.
IMO 0.23 is a good and timely release.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 9:39 PM, Arun Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
On Dec 2, 2011, at 1:16 AM, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had
I updated the artifacts.
--Konstantin
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
Roman,
Thanks for finding this.
The change is actually in the assemble script in Bigtop, which should
leave lib directories and the .txt files in the respective projects
worked
without any issues.
Cos
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 02:47AM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
I created a release candidate for hadoop-0.22.0 available for review at:
http://people.apache.org/~shv/hadoop-0.22.0-rc0/
The candidate incorporates more than 700 fixed jiras counting from
17, 2011, at 7:29 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
Let me repeat. By renaming ONLY 0.20.security to 1.0
you are replacing Hadoop-trunk with this branch.
Is that the intention of the rename?
Are we switching to the security branch as the new trunk?
--Konstantin
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:48
Let me repeat. By renaming ONLY 0.20.security to 1.0
you are replacing Hadoop-trunk with this branch.
Is that the intention of the rename?
Are we switching to the security branch as the new trunk?
--Konstantin
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:48 PM, Eric Yang eric...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
On Wed,
Consistency of naming the releases is a very valid point and should be
the main concern in the decision making.
If 0.20.205 is called Hadoop 1, and 0.23 called Hadoop 2, then
releasing 0.22 under 0.22 will be confusing.
If we vote only on renaming 0.20.205 to 1.0 then the 0.23 release
becomes
I don't think we should vote it that way.
Because 0.23 and 0.22 become confusing in this case.
Unless you want to replace trunk with what is in 0.20.205.
The three branches 0.20.security, o.22, and 0.23 have very different
codes bases. So calling them 1, 2, and 3 respectively is natural.
But we
MAPREDUCE-2767 removed LinuxTaskController as discussed earlier.
The idea is to port changes from 20.security in the subsequent release.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Owen O'Malley o...@hortonworks.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 2:29 AM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had
Hi everybody,
We reached the homestretch for hadoop-0.22 release.
The testing proceeds very well.
- The builds are building
- HDFS and MR are running under load well now.
- We applied pretty simple custom patches to make Hive (7) and Pig (8)
work with 0.22.
- HBase (92), which is expected to be
in the East Bay is that my 500 users will.
I also hear that if 0.22 was available people would use it now.
Thanks,
Konstajntin
From: Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.com
To: general@hadoop.apache.org
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2011 2:23 AM
Subject: Re: Update on hadoop
I am very glad that the development and testing of 0.23 is going so well.
I see a lot of commits and hundreds of changes going in literally every day.
It is great to see the new technology building!
On the criticism of the 0.22 release.
Arun has a top-down view and I agree a lot of progress have
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:27 PM, Eric Baldeschwieler
eri...@hortonworks.com wrote:
Hi Doug, Jeff, Roman
I'd like to request that folks take bigtop project discussions onto
the bigtop lists and don't greet status reports on general@hadoop
I am personally very interested in the results of
Roman,
Yes this was an attempt to upgrade avro.
I needed to commit to all three projects. But found a bug in the
middle. Reverted the patch, fixed the bug, will upgrade tonight.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote:
About connecting with other projects.
HBase is compiling with 0.22.
That is trunk of HBase right? IOW, we don't really have a released version
that is compatible with .22?
I mean HBase 0.92, which was branched recently.
For Pig there is
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-2277
.
Don't know about the API delta between .22 and .23 yet. I assume it is
less than 0.20 vs 0.22. But I may be wrong.
--Konstantin
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 2:21 AM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
== TESTING
I was looking into hadoop 0.22 builds and realized that the builds are
failing because of a known bug in clover 2.4.3, which we currently use
for Jenkins builds. The bug is fixed in later clover versions. I tried
to upgrade to clover 3.1.0, but clover.license does not work with that
version.
Thanks Owen. Will definitely look at those.
--Konstantin
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 9:10 AM, Owen O'Malley o...@hortonworks.com wrote:
Konst,
You should take a look at the evaluate, not just the things that
were marked as blockers 6 months ago, but also look at the things that
have gone out in
Hi everybody,
I think there is no need to change anything drastically with the plans
for Hadoop 0.22 release, so I'll continue along the lines previously
rendered by Nigel, discussed, and agreed upon within the community.
1. First thing, we need to resurrect Hadoop-0.22 Jenkins builds ASAP.
, and thus
0.23, are better for it.
Cheers,
Nige
On Sep 7, 2011, at 2:04 AM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
Eric,
It would take the same amount of resources to fix 0.22 as to merge
append and security branches aka 0.20.205.
Although I understand that Hortonworks needs to support its
customer(s
Eric,
It would take the same amount of resources to fix 0.22 as to merge
append and security branches aka 0.20.205.
Although I understand that Hortonworks needs to support its
customer(s) and is eager to bridge the gap in functionality with its
competitor(s), I think continuing with 0.20
+1 branching 0.23
Would be very good to stabilize Jenkins build before that.
--Konstantin
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Giridharan Kesavan
gkesa...@hortonworks.com wrote:
Arun,
I think getting a stable build on trunk through jenkins before
branching 0.23 would be good.
common build
+1 removing hdfs proxy
I do not think that Alfredo or any other project should be a precondition
for removing unused code.
--Konstantin
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Eli Collins e...@cloudera.com wrote:
Let's remove the HDFS proxy contrib component. It has not had a
meaningful contribution
Sanjay,
1. I don't see any comments in HDFS-1623 since may 26.
And I don't see any updates to the design document.
While HA jiras are being committed directly to trunk.
And I personally don't like what is being committed.
Possible because I don't understand the approach.
2. Whatever the
It should look something like this:
http://api.ning.com/files/6tMSBWmZ67YKGzfS0NBp6Xt67YUi5L4ft6OZRsIrq-3EO40OP0mqSJs4b3*5QV0V7shmKnK44LzEGzNSvmDUFqCv6hirrSWX/1105100WC001.jpeg
But given the choices: 6 2 4 5 1 3
I put 6 first because it's the only one having Apache logo on it.
I think whatever
220F 6980 1F27 E622
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author,
and do not necessarily represent the views of any company the author
might be affiliated with at the moment of writing.
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 17:57, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.com
wrote
I can see them well.
I think Suresh's point is that non-blockers are going into 0.22.
Nigel, do you have full control over it?
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Eric Baldeschwieler eri...@yahoo-inc.comwrote:
makes sense to me, but it might be good to work to make these
Lipcon t...@cloudera.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.comwrote:
I can see them well.
I think Suresh's point is that non-blockers are going into 0.22.
Nigel, do you have full control over it?
Of course it's up to Nigel to decide, but here's my
Konstantin, your issue with the test cases requiring a umask 02 is a good
point. I'll patch it and can roll a 0.20.203.1 release candidate.
umask is not a big concern. I reset it to standard 0022.
Still there were 8 other test failures: 7 in mapred, and 1 hdfsproxy.
Stable release should pass
the tests.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 1:39 AM, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.comwrote:
I think its a good idea to release hadoop-0.20.203. It moves Apache Hadoop
a step forward.
Looks like the technical difficulties are resolved now with latest Arun's
commits.
Being
I think its a good idea to release hadoop-0.20.203. It moves Apache Hadoop a
step forward.
Looks like the technical difficulties are resolved now with latest Arun's
commits.
Being a superset of hadoop-0.20.2 it can be considered based on one of the
official Apache releases.
I don't think there
hdfsproxy is a wrapper around hftpFileSystem (in its current state).
So you can always replace hdfsproxy with hftpFileSystem.
Also it uses pure FileSystem api, so it can successfully be maintained
outside of hdfs.
Therefore I am +1 removing it from hdfs/contrib.
What is the use case for
PM, Giridharan Kesavan
gkesa...@yahoo-inc.comwrote:
Konstantin,
I think I need to restart the slave which is running the commit build. For
now I have published the common artifact manually from commandline.
Thanks,
Giri
On Jan 31, 2011, at 4:27 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
Giri
looks
far is the build abort time
configuration. It was set to 30mins.
I have increased the build abort time and the builds are going on fine
https://hudson.apache.org/hudson/view/G-L/view/Hadoop/job/Hadoop-Common-trunk-Commit
Thanks,
Giri
On Feb 1, 2011, at 12:40 AM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote
is MAPREDUCE-2290,
which was fixed. Trees from trunk are compiling against each other
for me (eg each installed to a local maven repo), perhaps the upstream
maven repo hasn't been updated with the latest bits yet.
Thanks,
Eli
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
, Konstantin Shvachko
shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
Current trunk for HDFS and MapReduce are not compiling at the moment.
Try to
build trunk.
This is the result of that changes to common api introduced by
HADOOP-6904
are not promoted to HDFS and MR trunks.
HDFS-1335 and MAPREDUCE-2263 depend
, at 4:27 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
Giri
looks like the last run you started failed the same way as previous ones.
Any thoughts on what's going on?
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Giridharan Kesavan
gkesa...@yahoo-inc.comwrote:
ant mvn-deploy would
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Ian Holsman had...@holsman.net wrote:
I think Roy's suggestion of applying the commits individually to the branch
from your current working branch would help with this.
I am sure this is not what Roy suggested. Ian. I think the idea is simple.
If you decide
We actually still haven't recovered from the projects split.
We are still fixing HDFS and MR scripts with several jiras open.
If we start this re-split now again before the major release
we risk to get into the same mess, and it will create more work
for the community.
I see Nigel's point that
I also think building 0.20-append will be a major distraction from moving
0.22 forward with all the great new features, including the new append
implementation, sitting on the bench because we are delaying the release.
It seems to be beneficial for the entire community to focus on 0.22 rather
than
This is great! Thanks, Nigel.
I haven't seen the feature freeze for 0.22 formally announced.
May be it worth confirming it now by setting the start day, as of yesterday?
--Konstantin
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Nigel Daley nda...@mac.com wrote:
I think it's important we get more
, Dec 19, 2010 at 11:27 PM, Owen O'Malley omal...@apache.org wrote:
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Doug Cutting cutt...@apache.org wrote:
On 12/17/2010 02:34 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
It could be a zero-option plan - remove dependencies both for Avro and
ProtocolBuffers out
Owen, Doug, Tom
Could you please formulate and reply to this email separately
what would be an *ACCEPTABLE *resolution of
HADOOP-6685 for *YOU *to move *0.22* forward.
Just trying to get something to work with to get us beyond the stagnation
point.
It could be I want this patch in/out
It really takes time to understand the issue. I will spend more time reading
through it.
So far I feel that we need to distinguish between
a) issues that define the general direction for the project, and
b) the specifics of the implementation proposed by Owen, including decisions
induced by that
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Doug Cutting cutt...@apache.org wrote:
On 12/07/2010 03:27 AM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
The main contradictory issue on which Owen and Doug disagree (other people
as well) is whether
Hadoop should support multiple serializations or be based on one
designated
?
--Konstantin
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 11:19 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur t...@cloudera.comwrote:
Hey Konstantin,
have you seen how you can comment on patches and see side by side the
changes in RB?
It is quite handy.
Alejandro
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had
It looks very hard to follow.
I have really hard time matching jira and review board comments.
Especially when they interleave.
Why again do we need a second system for tracking issues?
--Konstantin
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:49 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@yahoo-inc.com wrote:
+1
On Oct 26, 2010,
+1
Konstantin
Do the good people of Hadoop support sending this request on to the Hadoop
PMC?
Looks like everybody voted already.
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote:
Please vote as to whether you think ZooKeeper should become a
top-level Apache project.
0
My thinking is that while MR and HDFS are the same product,
we can have joint committership.
If split happens there is no reason to have common committers,
like nobody is raising a question to merge e.g. tomcat and
subversion committers.
I think nobody does, but I don't know for sure of
On 8/9/2010 9:26 AM, Doug Cutting wrote:
On 08/08/2010 12:21 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
This of course begs a larger question - should we just merge Common,
HDFS Map-Reduce together and be done with?
I think there's still a reasonable long-term goal to split MapReduce
from HDFS, so that
Eli,
Thanks for a really good proposal.
Some questions / comments:
On voting
1. Which voting rule?
http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#ConsensusApproval
http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#MajorityApproval
I think you mean the MajorityApproval as it does not have veto
Eli,
Just checking on the status of this proposal.
In the past I was hesitant about introducing more formalities.
I now think we really need some mechanism for
new feature and project proposals, also tracking decisions.
For the reasons exactly as you describe in your email.
Whether it is going
On 2/18/2010 5:19 PM, Jeff Hammerbacher wrote:
Do we have consensus around rebasing on 0.21? Anyone already testing on 0.21
who would be upset if the current branch were to be retired?
Rebasing 0.21 will further delay the release.
In current 0.21 branch there is some 28 blockers,
which will
Good idea. +1 for this as a draft version.
1. Seems that Doug's corrections are more in line with the Apache Way, and
current hadoop practices +1.
2. I like the definition and phrasing for emeritus in here:
http://portals.apache.org/roles.html
Emeritus Committers
which says
- Any committer
It is the 19th, right?
--Konstantin
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
Ah, thanks. Hope to make it!
Eelco
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Jakob Homanjho...@yahoo-inc.com wrote:
Eelco-
The August meetup will be the 19th at Yahoo!. For this month you can sign
up to attend at meetup
99 matches
Mail list logo
