The "git" way of doing things would be to rebase the feature branch on
master (trunk) and then commit the patch stack.
Squashing the entire feature into a 10 MB megapatch is the "svn" way of
doing things.
The svn workflow evolved because merging feature branches back to trunk
was really painful i
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017, at 14:22, Allen Wittenauer wrote:
>
> > On Aug 28, 2017, at 12:41 PM, Jason Lowe wrote:
> >
> > I think this gets back to the "if it's worth committing" part.
>
> This brings us back to my original question:
>
> "Doesn't this place an undue burden on the contr
+1 for starting thinking about releasing 2.7 soon.
Re: building Windows binaries. Do we release binaries for all the
Linux and UNIX architectures? I thought we didn't. It seems a little
inconsistent to release binaries just for Windows, but not for those
other architectures and OSes. I wonder
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 7:46 AM, Steve Loughran wrote:
> On 8 December 2014 at 14:58, Ted Yu wrote:
>
>> Looks like there was still OutOfMemoryError :
>>
>>
>> https://builds.apache.org/job/Hadoop-Hdfs-trunk/1964/testReport/junit/org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.snapshot/TestRenameWithSnapsh
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Karthik Kambatla wrote:
> It would be nice to cut the branch for the next "feature" release (not just
> Java 7) in the first week of January, so we can get the RC out by the end
> of the month?
>
> Yesterday, this came up in an offline discussion on ATS. Given peop
I'm usually an advocate for getting rid of unnecessary dependencies
(cough, jetty, cough), but a lot of the things in Guava are really
useful.
Immutable collections, BiMap, Multisets, Arrays#asList, the stuff for
writing hashCode() and equals(), String#Joiner, the list goes on. We
particularly us
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Allen Wittenauer wrote:
>
> It’s now September. With the passage of time, I have a lot of doubts
> about this plan and where that trajectory takes us.
>
> * The list of changes that are already in branch-2 scare the crap out of any
> risk adverse person
Thanks for making this happen, Karthik and Daniel. Great job.
best,
Colin
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Karthik Kambatla wrote:
> Yes, we have requested for force-push disabled on trunk and branch-*
> branches. I didn't test it though :P, it is not writable yet.
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at
+1.
best,
Colin
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Karthik Kambatla wrote:
> I have put together this proposal based on recent discussion on this topic.
>
> Please vote on the proposal. The vote runs for 7 days.
>
>1. Migrate from subversion to git for version control.
>2. Force-push to be
+1.
Colin
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Karthik Kambatla
wrote:
> Hi devs
>
> As you might have noticed, we have several classes and methods in them that
> are not annotated at all. This is seldom intentional. Avoiding incompatible
> changes to all these classes can be considerable baggage.
Looks good.
+1, also non-binding.
I downloaded the source tarball, checked md5, built, ran some unit
tests, ran an HDFS cluster.
cheers,
Colin
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Andrew Wang wrote:
> Thanks for putting this together Arun.
>
> +1 non-binding
>
> Downloaded source tarball
> Verifie
If 2.4 is released in January, I think it's very unlikely to include
symlinks. There is still a lot of work to be done before they're
usable. You can look at the progress on HADOOP-10019. For some of
the subtasks, it will require some community discussion before any
code can be written.
For bet
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
>
> On Nov 12, 2013, at 1:54 PM, Todd Lipcon wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Colin McCabe wrote:
>>
>>> To be honest, I'm not aware of anything in 2.2.1 that shouldn't be
>>> the
HADOOP-10020 is a JIRA that disables symlinks temporarily. They will
be disabled in 2.2.1 as well, if the plan is to have only minor fixes
in that branch.
To be honest, I'm not aware of anything in 2.2.1 that shouldn't be
there. However, I have only been following the HDFS and common side
of thi
I don't think HADOOP-9972 is a must-do for the next Apache release,
whatever version number it ends up having. It's just adding a new
API, not changing any existing ones, and it can be done entirely in
generic code. (The globber doesn't involve FileSystem or AFS
subclasses).
My understanding is
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
> Yes, sorry if it wasn't clear.
>
> As others seem to agree, I think we'll be better getting a protocol/api
> stable GA done and then iterating on bugs etc.
>
> I'm not super worried about HADOOP-9984 since symlinks just made it to
> branch-2
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Stack wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Colin McCabe wrote:
>
>> St.Ack wrote:
>>
>> > + Once I figured where the logs were, found that JAVA_HOME was not being
>> > exported (don't need this in hadoop-2.0.5 for inst
St.Ack wrote:
> + Once I figured where the logs were, found that JAVA_HOME was not being
> exported (don't need this in hadoop-2.0.5 for instance). Adding an
> exported JAVA_HOME to my running shell which don't seem right but it took
> care of it (I gave up pretty quick on messing w/
> yarn.nodem
18 matches
Mail list logo
