Mar 2020 at 11:24 PM, Arpit Agarwal
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Sorry,didn't get you...do you mean, once release voting is
> > >>>>>>>>> processed
gt;>>>>>> Yes, that is what I meant. I don’t want us to make more
> >> mandatory
> >>>> work
> >>>>>> for
> >>>>>>>> the release manager because the job is hard enough already.
> >>>>>>>&g
>>>> work
>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> the release manager because the job is hard enough already.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mar 17, 2020, at 10:46 AM, Brahma Reddy Battula <
>>>>
image for ARM also which support all scripts
> > > > >>> (createrelease, start-build-env.sh, etc ).
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-16797
> > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > >>>
> > >>>> Can ARM binaries be provided after the fact? We cannot increase the
> > RM’s
> > >>>> burden by asking them to generate an extra set of binaries.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>&
>>>> burden by asking them to generate an extra set of binaries.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Mar 17, 2020, at 10:23 AM, Brahma Reddy Battula <
> bra...@apache.org>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>&
generate an extra set of binaries.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Mar 17, 2020, at 10:23 AM, Brahma Reddy Battula <
> bra...@apache.org>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> + Dev mailing list.
>
naries.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 17, 2020, at 10:23 AM, Brahma Reddy Battula
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> + Dev mailing list.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Forwarded message -
>>>>&
t; wrote:
> >>>
> >>> + Dev mailing list.
> >>>
> >>> -- Forwarded message -
> >>> From: Brahma Reddy Battula
> >>> Date: Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 10:31 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Hadoop 3.3.0 Rel
Battula
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> + Dev mailing list.
>>>
>>> -- Forwarded message -----
>>> From: Brahma Reddy Battula
>>> Date: Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 10:31 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Hadoop 3.3.0 Release include ARM bi
Forwarded message -
> > From: Brahma Reddy Battula
> > Date: Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 10:31 PM
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Hadoop 3.3.0 Release include ARM binary
> > To: junping_du
> >
> >
> > thanks junping for your reply.
> >
> &
Thanks Masatake!!
I was aware of this thread which you given for reference as I am the source
to discuss this(as I verified binary and given some comments). Please check
following for same.
https://lists.apache.org/list.html?common-...@hadoop.apache.org:2017-7
AFAIK, that discussion whether we
ahma Reddy Battula
> Date: Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 10:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Hadoop 3.3.0 Release include ARM binary
> To: junping_du
>
>
> thanks junping for your reply.
>
> bq. I think most of us in Hadoop community doesn't want to have biased
> on ARM or
+ Dev mailing list.
-- Forwarded message -
From: Brahma Reddy Battula
Date: Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Hadoop 3.3.0 Release include ARM binary
To: junping_du
thanks junping for your reply.
bq. I think most of us in Hadoop community doesn't want
This thread seems to be relevant.
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0d2a1b39f7e890c4f40be5fd92f107fbf048b936005901b7b53dd0f1%40%3Ccommon-dev.hadoop.apache.org%3E
> Convenience binary artifacts are not official release artifacts and thus
> are not voted on. However, since they are
Hi Brahma,
I think most of us in Hadoop community doesn't want to have biased on
ARM or any other platforms.
The only thing I try to understand is how much complexity get involved
for our RM work. Does that potentially become a blocker for future
releases? And how we can get rid of this
If you can provide ARM release for future releases, I'm fine with that.
Thanks,
Akira
On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 9:41 PM Brahma Reddy Battula
wrote:
> thanks Akira.
>
> Currently only problem is dedicated ARM for future RM.This i want to sort
> out like below,if you've some other,please let me
thanks Akira.
Currently only problem is dedicated ARM for future RM.This i want to sort
out like below,if you've some other,please let me know.
i) Single machine and share cred to future RM ( as we can delete keys once
release is over).
ii) Creating the jenkins project ( may be we need to
Hi Brahma,
I think we cannot do any of your proposed actions.
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#owned-controlled-hardware
> Strictly speaking, releases must be verified on hardware owned and
controlled by the committer. That means hardware the committer has physical
possession and
Hello folks,
As currently trunk will support ARM based compilation and qbt(1) is running
from several months with quite stable, hence planning to propose ARM binary
this time.
( Note : As we'll know voting will be based on the source,so this will not
issue.)
*Proposed Change:*
Currently in
20 matches
Mail list logo
