Thanks Andrew and Wangda for comments! To me, an improvement with 17 patches is not a big problem as this is self-contained and I didn't see a single line of delete/update on existing code - well, arguably, patches with only adding code can also have big impact but not likely the case here.
While the dependency discussions on HADOOP-14964 are still going on, I will leave the decision to JIRA discussion based on which approach we will choose(shaded?) and impact. If we cannot make consensus in short term, probably we have to miss this in 2.8.3 release. Okay. Last call for blocker/critical fixes landing on branch-2.8.3. RC0 will get cut-off shortly. Thanks, Junping ________________________________ From: Wangda Tan <wheele...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 10:52 AM To: Andrew Wang Cc: Junping Du; Zheng, Kai; common-...@hadoop.apache.org; hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org; mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org; yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org Subject: Re: Apache Hadoop 2.8.3 Release Plan Thanks Junping for driving this. For the bug fix vs. improvement, it is actually very hard to define, improvement could be self-contained and useful, bug fix could be dangerous in some cases. To me, If an improvement fixed some existing use case, and the fix is self-contained. I will be open to bring such fix to maintenance release. For example, in 2.8.2, we back ported CapacityScheduler intra queue preemption https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-2113. It is a big change in terms of patch size, but since it fixes broken use case (balance user usage under Capacity Scheduler leaf queue), we backported it to 2.8.2 after thorough tests and validations by Yahoo. I'm not quite familiar with HADOOP-14964, I will leave the decision to committers who know more about the field. Just my 2 cents. Regards, Wangda On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Andrew Wang <andrew.w...@cloudera.com<mailto:andrew.w...@cloudera.com>> wrote: The Aliyun OSS code isn't a small improvement. If you look at Sammi's comment <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-14964?focusedCommentId=16247085&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16247085>, it's a 17 patch series that is being backported in one shot. What we're talking about is equivalent to merging a feature branch in a maintenance release. I see that Kai and Chris are having a discussion about the dependency changes, which indicates this is not a zero-risk change either. We really should not be changing dependency versions in a maintenance unless it's because of a bug. It's unfortunate from a timing perspective that this missed 2.9.0, but I still think it should wait for the next minor. Merging a feature into a maintenance release sets the wrong precedent. Best, Andrew On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Junping Du <j...@hortonworks.com<mailto:j...@hortonworks.com>> wrote: > Thanks Kai for calling out this feature/improvement for attention and > Andrew for comments. > > > While I agree that maintenance release should focus on important bug fix > only, I doubt we have strict rules to disallow any features/improvements to > land on maint release especially when those are small footprint or low > impact on existing code/features. In practice, we indeed has 77 new > features/improvements in latest 2.7.3 and 2.7.4 release. > > > Back to HADOOP-14964, I did a quick check and it looks like case here > belongs to self-contained improvement that has very low impact on existing > code base, so I am OK with the improvement get landed on branch-2.8 in case > it is well reviewed and tested. > > > However, as RM of branch-2.8, I have two concerns to accept it in our > 2.8.3 release: > > 1. Timing - as I mentioned in beginning, the main purpose of 2.8.3 are for > several critical bug fixes and we should target to release it very soon - > my current plan is to cut RC out within this week inline with waiting > for 3.0.0 vote closing. Can this improvement be well tested against > branch-2.8.3 within this strictly timeline? It seems a bit rush unless we > have strong commitment on test plan and activities in such a tight time. > > > 2. Upgrading - I haven't heard we settle down the plan of releasing this > feature in 2.9.1 release - though I saw some discussions are going on > at HADOOP-14964. Assume 2.8.3 is released ahead of 2.9.1 and it includes > this improvement, then users consuming this feature/improvement have no 2.9 > release to upgrade or forcefully upgrade with regression. We may need a > better upgrade story here. > > > Pls let me know what you think. Thanks! > > > > Thanks, > > > Junping > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Andrew Wang > <andrew.w...@cloudera.com<mailto:andrew.w...@cloudera.com>> > *Sent:* Monday, November 20, 2017 10:22 PM > *To:* Zheng, Kai > *Cc:* Junping Du; > common-...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:common-...@hadoop.apache.org>; > hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org>; > mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org>; > yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org> > *Subject:* Re: Apache Hadoop 2.8.3 Release Plan > > I'm against including new features in maintenance releases, since they're > meant to be bug-fix only. > > If we're struggling with being able to deliver new features in a safe and > timely fashion, let's try to address that, not overload the meaning of > "maintenance release". > > Best, > Andrew > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Zheng, Kai > <kai.zh...@intel.com<mailto:kai.zh...@intel.com>> wrote: > >> Hi Junping, >> >> Thank you for making 2.8.2 happen and now planning the 2.8.3 release. >> >> I have an ask, is it convenient to include the back port work for OSS >> connector module? We have some Hadoop users that wish to have it by default >> for convenience, though in the past they used it by back porting >> themselves. I have raised this and got thoughts from Chris and Steve. Looks >> like this is more wanted for 2.9 but I wanted to ask again here for broad >> feedback and thoughts by this chance. The back port patch is available for >> 2.8 and the one for branch-2 was already in. IMO, 2.8.x is promising as we >> can see some shift from 2.7.x, hence it's worth more important features and >> efforts. How would you think? Thanks! >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-14964 >> >> Regards, >> Kai >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Junping Du [mailto:j...@hortonworks.com<mailto:j...@hortonworks.com>] >> Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 9:02 AM >> To: common-...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:common-...@hadoop.apache.org>; >> hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org>; >> mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org>; >> yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org> >> Subject: Apache Hadoop 2.8.3 Release Plan >> >> Hi, >> We have several important fixes get landed on branch-2.8 and I would >> like to cut off branch-2.8.3 now to start 2.8.3 release work. >> So far, I don't see any pending blockers on 2.8.3, so my current plan >> is to cut off 1st RC of 2.8.3 in next several days: >> - For all coming commits to land on branch-2.8, please mark the >> fix version as 2.8.4. >> - If there is a really important fix for 2.8.3 and getting >> closed, please notify me ahead before landing it on branch-2.8.3. >> Please let me know if you have any thoughts or comments on the plan. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Junping >> ________________________________________ >> From: dujunp...@gmail.com<mailto:dujunp...@gmail.com> >> <dujunp...@gmail.com<mailto:dujunp...@gmail.com>> on behalf of 俊平堵 < >> junping...@apache.org<mailto:junping...@apache.org>> >> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 3:33 PM >> To: gene...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:gene...@hadoop.apache.org> >> Subject: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Hadoop 2.8.2 Release. >> >> Hi all, >> >> It gives me great pleasure to announce that the Apache Hadoop >> community has voted to release Apache Hadoop 2.8.2, which is now available >> for download from Apache mirrors[1]. For download instructions please refer >> to the Apache Hadoop Release page [2]. >> >> Apache Hadoop 2.8.2 is the first GA release of Apache Hadoop 2.8 line and >> our newest stable release for entire Apache Hadoop project. For major >> changes incuded in Hadoop 2.8 line, please refer Hadoop 2.8.2 main page[3]. >> >> This release has 315 resolved issues since previous 2.8.1 release with >> following >> breakdown: >> - 91 in Hadoop Common >> - 99 in HDFS >> - 105 in YARN >> - 20 in MapReduce >> Please read the log of CHANGES[4] and RELEASENOTES[5] for more details. >> >> The release news is posted on the Hadoop website too, you can go to the >> downloads section directly [6]. >> >> Thank you all for contributing to the Apache Hadoop release! >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Junping >> >> >> [1] http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/hadoop/common >> >> [2] http://hadoop.apache.org/releases.html >> >> [3] http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.8.2/index.html >> >> [4] >> http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.8.2/hadoop-project-dist/had >> oop-common/release/2.8.2/CHANGES.2.8.2.html >> >> [5] >> http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.8.2/hadoop-project-dist/had >> oop-common/release/2.8.2/RELEASENOTES.2.8.2.html >> >> [6] http://hadoop.apache.org/releases.html#Download >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> common-dev-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:common-dev-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org> >> For additional commands, e-mail: >> common-dev-h...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:common-dev-h...@hadoop.apache.org> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> hdfs-dev-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:hdfs-dev-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org> >> For additional commands, e-mail: >> hdfs-dev-h...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:hdfs-dev-h...@hadoop.apache.org> >> >> >
