On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Chris Douglas cdoug...@apache.org wrote:
Calling it something other than Hadoop would avoid confusing users
(and HBase could then release bug fixes, etc. on its own schedule),
but from how it's been described: this is acknowledging the reality of
the
I have a feeling we are thinking too much here.
The reality is that the Hadoop community was in favor of porting append
(fixes?) back to a branch based off hadoop-0.20 a while ago (Dhruba proposed
the branch).
I see no reason we can't release it now, under a reasonable release name.
As Stack
Does anything go wrong if HBase were to release the 0.20-append branch
as its own product?
Even if it were short-lived, it sounds like that would give HBase
users a working append, the HBase project could decide when to retire
that work (and support it concurrently with post-0.20 append), and it
That sounds like a reasonable solution to me: the HBase team bears the
burden of cutting an maintaining the release, while Hadoop Core can proceed
with 0.22. HBase had its own version of ZooKeeper in there for a while, if I
recall correctly, so it's not without precedent. No funky version numbers
Calling it something other than Hadoop would avoid confusing users
(and HBase could then release bug fixes, etc. on its own schedule),
but from how it's been described: this is acknowledging the reality of
the situation, not proposing something radical.
HBase can be backed by the HBase FooFS and
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 11:07 PM, Roy T. Fielding field...@gbiv.com wrote:
Features are not release version tags. If there is a security bug
found then we would have to release a new version of the append
version, and a round of severe trout slapping would result.
Yeah, it isn't a perfect
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Owen O'Malley omal...@apache.org wrote:
If I remember right, there were also protocol changes in the append branch,
which was another reason we didn't want to put it directly into the 0.20
branch.
That is indeed the case Owen.
St.Ack
[ Sorry if this is be-laboring the obvious ]
There are two append solutions floating around, and they are incompatible
with each other. Thus, the two branches will forever remain incompatible
with each other, regardless of how they are numbered (0.22, 0.23, 0.20.3,
e.t.c.)
Unless both are
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:15 AM, M. C. Srivas mcsri...@gmail.com wrote:
Regardless, there will still be 2 incompatible branches. And that is only
the beginning.
Some future features will be done only on branch 1 (since company 1 uses
that), and other features on branch 2 (by company 2,
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
)
--- On Thu, 12/23/10, Ryan Rawson ryano...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Ryan Rawson ryano...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: DISCUSSION: Cut a hadoop-0.20.0-append release from the tip
of branch-0.20-append branch?
To: general@hadoop.apache.org
Date: Thursday, December 23, 2010, 2:39 PM
How does
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 14:18, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.com wrote:
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
The intent of the proposed release off the branch-0.20-append was
never to derail, “hurt”, or distract from the Hadoop 0.22 effort. The
HBase crew are up for helping out testing and debugging and the intent
is to run atop the 0.22 version of append as well as 0.20’s append. A
release off the
I propose cutting a release from the tip of the branch-0.20-append
branch [1]. I suggest the release be called hadoop-0.20.0-append. I
volunteer to run the release process. Are folks OK with this?
Here's some background.
The branch-0.20-append was forked from branch-0.20 a few months ago by
Hi St.Ack.
In general I'm opposed to such a thing.
There are already 5 Hadoop 20.x releases out there, I don't think there is a
need for another. (personal opinion, not a veto or speaking as the chair)
Is there a reason why we couldn't create a hadoop 0.20.3 release that has this
patch inside
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Ian Holsman had...@holsman.net wrote:
There are already 5 Hadoop 20.x releases out there, I don't think there is a
need for another. (personal opinion, not a veto or speaking as the chair)
Are you counting other than Apache releases? (I see only 4 here, two
Thats why I think we should go to 0.22 ASAP and get companies to build
their new features on trunk against that.
There was a thread in Nov - 'Caution using Hadoop 0.21'
It would be helpful to see response to 0.22
Thanks for getting the discussion off the ground,
St.Ack
...@holsman.net
Subject: Re: DISCUSSION: Cut a hadoop-0.20.0-append release from the tip of
branch-0.20-append branch?
To: general@hadoop.apache.org
Date: Wednesday, December 22, 2010, 5:03 PM
On Dec 23, 2010, at 11:33 AM, Stack wrote:
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Ian Holsman had...@holsman.net
of attack prove their worth by hitting back.
- Piet Hein (via Tom White)
--- On Wed, 12/22/10, Ian Holsman had...@holsman.net wrote:
From: Ian Holsman had...@holsman.net
Subject: Re: DISCUSSION: Cut a hadoop-0.20.0-append release from the tip of
branch-0.20-append branch?
To: general
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Ian Holsman had...@holsman.net wrote:
Hi St.Ack.
In general I'm opposed to such a thing.
There are already 5 Hadoop 20.x releases out there, I don't think there is
a need for another.
Stack is trying to get an Apache version of Hadoop that solves his
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Ian Holsman had...@holsman.net wrote:
Are you counting other than Apache releases? (I see only 4 here, two
of which probably should be removed:
http://www.gtlib.gatech.edu/pub/apache//hadoop/core/.)
yes.. I was referring to the external companies who have
In that case, I'm +1 on releasing a 20+append branch, but am nervous on how
much effort will be put into testing it. But this option is better than the
current apache alternative out there as you and Owen mentioned.
---
Ian Holsman - 703 879-3128
I saw the angel in the marble and carved until
22 matches
Mail list logo
