Re: Plans of moving towards JDK7 in trunk

On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 10:02 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > > Hadoop 3.x out the door later this year > > +1 that makes sense to me. Thanks for volunteering Steve - I'm glad to > share the pain… ;-) Hey Arun, you may have missed that Andrew volunteered for doing this as well (the thread is long,

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.4.1

+1 (non-binding) Successfully redo the steps for rc0 before for rc1 as well. On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 6:22 AM, Steve Loughran wrote: > +1 (binding) > > >1. rm -rf ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/hadoop/ >2. build and test of slider/incubating develop branch with profile >hadoop-2.4.1, w

Re: Plans of moving towards JDK7 in trunk

After further consideration, here is an alternate. On Jun 21, 2014, at 11:14 AM, "Arun C. Murthy" wrote: > > JDK6 eol was Feb 2013 and, a year later, we are still have customers using it > - which means we can't drop it yet. > > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html > > Give

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.4.1

+1 (binding) 1. rm -rf ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/hadoop/ 2. build and test of slider/incubating develop branch with profile hadoop-2.4.1, which downloaded all the new artifacts from the repository 3. -tests passed -steve On 20 June 2014 23:51, Arun C Murthy wrote: > Folks, >

Re: Plans of moving towards JDK7 in trunk

Andrew, > On Jun 21, 2014, at 8:01 AM, Andrew Wang wrote: > > Hi Steve, let me confirm that I understand your proposal correctly: > > - Release an intermediate Hadoop 3 a few months out, based on JDK7 and with > bumped library versions > - Release a Hadoop 4 mid next year, based on JDK8 > > I

Re: [DISCUSS] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

Uma, Voting periods are defined in *minimum* terms, so it already covers what you'd like to see i.e. the vote can continue longer. thanks, Arun > On Jun 21, 2014, at 2:19 AM, "Gangumalla, Uma" > wrote: > > How about proposing vote for 5days and give chance to RM for extending vote > for 2m

Re: Plans of moving towards JDK7 in trunk

On 21 June 2014 08:01, Andrew Wang wrote: > Hi Steve, let me confirm that I understand your proposal correctly: > > - Release an intermediate Hadoop 3 a few months out, based on JDK7 and with > bumped library versions > - Release a Hadoop 4 mid next year, based on JDK8 > > I question the utility

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.4.1

Sounds good to me. Remove MAPREDUCE-5831 out of the scope of 2.4.1. On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 2:29 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > On Jun 20, 2014, at 11:23 AM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli > wrote: > > > Unfortunately even though we documented wire compatiblity, cross-version > > client/server support do

Re: Plans of moving towards JDK7 in trunk

Hi Steve, let me confirm that I understand your proposal correctly: - Release an intermediate Hadoop 3 a few months out, based on JDK7 and with bumped library versions - Release a Hadoop 4 mid next year, based on JDK8 I question the utility of an intermediate Hadoop 3 like this. Assuming that it

Hadoop-Hdfs-trunk - Build # 1781 - Still Failing

See https://builds.apache.org/job/Hadoop-Hdfs-trunk/1781/ ### ## LAST 60 LINES OF THE CONSOLE ### [...truncated 13193 lines...] [INFO] [INFO] --- maven-source-plugin:2.

Build failed in Jenkins: Hadoop-Hdfs-trunk #1781

See Changes: [kasha] YARN-2187. FairScheduler: Disable max-AM-share check by default. (Robert Kanter via kasha) [acmurthy] Updated release notes for hadoop-2.4.1 rc1. [cnauroth] HDFS-6222. Remove background token renewer from webhd

Re: [DISCUSS] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1. Non-binding. Thanks, Junping On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 10:54 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > Folks, > > I'd like to propose we change our by-laws to reduce our voting periods on > new releases from 7 days to 5. > > Currently, it just takes too long to turn around releases; particularly > if we

RE: [DISCUSS] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

How about proposing vote for 5days and give chance to RM for extending vote for 2more days( total to 7days) if the rc did not receive enough vote within 5days? If a rc received enough votes in 5days, RM can close vote. I can see an advantage of 7days voting is, that will cover all the week and w