On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 1:29 AM, Matt Foley <mfo...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > Also, I believe in the HDFS-2246 Jira, Todd requested extra time to review, > due to commitments at Hadoop World. Todd, would Monday be sufficient extra > time, so as not to slow down the anticipated release schedule too much? > Yes, I will probably have time to review it by Monday. But the review-time concern is separate from the concern about which version this should go into. Calling this a "critical fix" for HBase is a bit strange as 99.9% of the HBase installs out there do not use it. Trend Micro and Facebook are the only ones I'm aware of that do. And the patch as it stands today has a very suspect security model... -Todd > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Eli Collins <e...@cloudera.com> wrote: > >> Hey guys, >> >> HDFS-2246 is not a fix, it's a non-trivial performance optimization. >> The roadmap page is pretty clear.. "Point releases are made to fix >> critical bugs. They do not introduce new features or make other >> improvements other than fixing bugs". >> >> I'm not opposed to the change, I'm just pointing out that we agreed to >> develop trunk first, and we agreed to follow the release policies for >> the sustaining branch. I don't see why we can't honor those >> agreements, ie why not post a patch for trunk first and then backport >> it to 206? Reasonable? >> >> Thanks, >> Eli >> >> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Suresh Srinivas <sur...@hortonworks.com> >> wrote: >> > Eli, >> > >> > As Jitendra indicated in the jira, this was originally supposed to be >> part >> > of 0.205. Due to time crunc, we could not get this done in 0.205. This >> can >> > be turned off by a flag and only can be enabled by users who want to use >> > the functionality. Given that, I feel it is okay to go into 0.205.1. >> > >> > I agree it would be good to have a trunk patch for this and make it part >> of >> > 0.23. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Suresh >> > >> > On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Eli Collins <e...@cloudera.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Hey Matt, >> >> >> >> Is HDFS-2246 slated for 0.20.205.1? Given that it's not a bug and is >> >> non-trivial it seems better suited for 206 than a point release. Also, >> >> per the sustaining roadmap - http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/Roadmap - >> >> "Only functionality already committed to trunk should be submitted to >> >> a sustaining release." and this functionality does not yet have a >> >> patch for trunk yet (let alone committed). >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Eli >> >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Matt Foley <ma...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> > Hi all, >> >> > I propose to make a 0.20.205.1 candidate soon, with the following >> sets of >> >> > patches: >> >> > >> >> > - deficiencies in HBase support, pointed out by the HBase team and >> >> others >> >> > - deficiencies in webhdfs support on secure clusters >> >> > - a couple last-minute fixes submitted to branch-0.20-security-205 >> that >> >> > were too late to be included in 205.0 >> >> > >> >> > If you would like other patches included, and you feel it is >> appropriate >> >> to >> >> > have them in 205.1 rather than waiting for 206.0, please declare them >> by >> >> > setting the "Target Versions" field in their Jiras, and they will >> receive >> >> > due consideration, assuming that the proposed patch is actually >> >> > contributed, tested, reviewed, approved, and committed >> >> > to branch-0.20-security-205 by the freeze date :-) >> >> > >> >> > I would like to make the rc0 candidate next Friday, so I propose to >> >> declare >> >> > 205.1 code freeze at noon, PST, Friday 11 Nov. If this is a problem >> for >> >> > anyone, please let me know. >> >> > >> >> > Thank you, and best regards, >> >> > --Matt (Release Manager) >> >> > >> >> >> > >> > -- Todd Lipcon Software Engineer, Cloudera
