on a local rig here:
[image: image.png]
Stack
On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 11:48 AM Steve Loughran
wrote:
> I have put together a release candidate (RC1) for Hadoop 3.3.4
>
> The RC is available at:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hadoop/hadoop-3.3.4-RC1/
>
> The git tag is re
+1 (binding)
* Signature: ok
* Checksum : ok
* Rat check (10.0.2): ok
- mvn clean apache-rat:check
* Built from source (10.0.2): ok
- mvn clean install -DskipTests
* Unit tests pass (10.0.2): ok
- mvn package -P runAllTests -Dsur
+1 (binding)
* Signature: ok
* Checksum : passed
* Rat check (1.8.0_191): passed
- mvn clean apache-rat:check
* Built from source (1.8.0_191): failed
- mvn clean install -DskipTests
- mvn -fae --no-transfer-progress -DskipTests -Dmaven.javadoc.skip=true
-Pnative -Drequire.openssl
+1
Verified checksums, signatures, and rat-check are good.
Built (RC4) locally from source and ran a small hdfs cluster with hbase on
top. Ran an hbase upload w/ chaos and verification and hdfs seemed to do
the right thing.
S
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 9:17 PM Chao Sun wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Here'
+1 (binding)
* Signature: ok
* Checksum : ok
* Rat check (1.8.0_191): ok
- mvn clean apache-rat:check
* Built from source (1.8.0_191): ok
- mvn clean install -DskipTests
Poking around in the binary, it looks good. Unpacked site. Looks right.
Chec
+1
* Signature: ok
* Checksum : ok
* Rat check (1.8.0_191): ok
- mvn clean apache-rat:check
* Built from source (1.8.0_191): ok
- mvn clean install -DskipTests
Ran a ten node cluster w/ hbase on top running its verification loadings w/
(ge
+1
* I verified src tgz is signed with the key from
https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/weichiu.asc
* Verified hash.
* Built from src w/ -Prelease profile
* Checked CHANGES against git log.
S
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:55 PM Wei-Chiu Chuang wrote:
> Hello my fellow Hadoop developers,
>
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 6:41 AM Steve Loughran
wrote:
>
> Regarding blockers &c: how about we have a little hackathon where we try
> and get things in. This means a promise of review time from the people with
> commit rights and other people who understand the code (Stack?)
Thanks for bringing up the topic Wei-Chiu. +1 on a 3.3.1 soon.
Was going to spend time testing
Yours,
S
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 5:28 PM Wei-Chiu Chuang wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Hadoop 3.3.0 was released half a year ago, and as of now we've accumulated
> more than 400 changes in the branch-3.3.
On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> It is an interesting question whether Ozone should be a part of Hadoop.
>
I don't see a direct answer to this question. Is there one? Pardon me if
I've not seen it but I'm interested in the response.
I ask because IMO
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Chris Douglas
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Stack wrote:
> >> The former; an intermediate handler decoding, [modifying,] and
> >> encoding the record without losing unknown fields.
> >>
> >
> > I did not tr
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 3:12 PM, Chris Douglas
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Stack wrote:
> > Is the below evidence enough that pb3 in proto2 syntax mode does not drop
> > 'unknown' fields? (Maybe you want evidence that java tooling behaves the
> &g
file: pb_drops_two.proto. Please use 'syntax =
"proto2";' or 'syntax = "proto3";' to specify a syntax version. (Defaulted
to proto2 syntax.)
input:2:1: Expected identifier, got: 2
Proto 2.5 does same:
$ ~/bin/protobuf-2.5.0/src/protoc --encode=Test pb_drop
alternatives. Since we can't require that our
> > >> applications compile (or link) against our updated schema, this
> creates
> > a
> > >> problem that PB was supposed to solve.
> > >
> > >
> > > This is scary, and it potentially
In general +1 on 3.0.0. Its time. If we start now, it might make it out by
2016. If we start now, downstreamers can start aligning themselves to land
versions that suit at about the same time.
While two big items have been called out as possible incompatible changes,
and there is ongoing discussio
I filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-5852 as a blocker. See
what ye all think.
Thanks,
St.Ack
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Aaron T. Myers wrote:
> I just filed this JIRA as a blocker for 2.3:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10310
>
> The tl;dr is that JNs will
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I've created a release candidate (rc2) for hadoop-2.1.0-beta that I would
> like to get released - this fixes the bugs we saw since the last go-around
> (rc1).
>
> The RC is available at:
> http://people.apache.org/~acmurthy/hadoo
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Suresh Srinivas wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote:
>
> > I think that using "-(alpha,beta)" tags on the release versions is a
> really
> > bad idea.
>
>
> Why? Can you please share some reasons?
>
>
We already had a means for denoting 'al
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
> Would it better to have 2.0.3-alpha, 2.0.4-beta and then make 2.1 as a
> stable release? This way we just have one series (2.0.x) which is not
> suitable for general consumption.
>
>
That contains the versioning damage to the 2.0.x set. Th
es things better since
> no amount of numbering lipstick will make the software better or viable for
> the long-term for both users and other projects. Worse, it will force HBase
> and other projects to deal with *even more* major Hadoop releases... which
> seems like a royal pita.
>
20 matches
Mail list logo
