With two active sustaining branches (2.6, 2.7), what would you think of releasing trunk as 3.x instead of pushing 2.8? There are many new features (EC, Y1197, etc.), and trunk could be the source of several alpha/beta releases before we fork the 3.x line. -C
On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 12:49 PM, Vinod Vavilapalli <vino...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > As you may have noted, 2.8.0 got completely derailed what with 2.7.x and the > unusually long 2.6.1 release. > > With 2.6.1 out of the way, and two parallel threads in progress for 2.6.2 and > 2.7.2, it’s time for us to look back at where we are with Hadoop 2.8. > > I’ll do a quick survey of where the individual features are and the amount of > content already present in 2.8 and kick-start 2.8.0 process again. > > +Vinod > > >> On Apr 21, 2015, at 2:39 PM, vino...@apache.org wrote: >> >> With 2.7.0 out of the way, and with more maintenance releases to stabilize >> it, I propose we start thinking about 2.8.0. >> >> Here's my first cut of the proposal, will update the Roadmap wiki. >> - Support *both* JDK7 and JDK8 runtimes: HADOOP-11090 >> - Compatibility tools to catch backwards, forwards compatibility issues at >> patch submission, release times. Some of it is captured at YARN-3292. This >> also involves resurrecting jdiff (HADOOP-11776/YARN-3426/MAPREDUCE-6310) >> and/or investing in new tools. >> - HADOOP-11656 Classpath isolation for downstream clients >> - Support for Erasure Codes in HDFS HDFS-7285 >> - Early work for disk and network isolation in YARN: YARN-2139, YARN-2140 >> - YARN Timeline Service Next generation: YARN-2928. At least branch-merge + >> early peek. >> - Supporting non-exclusive node-labels: YARN-3214 >> >> I'm experimenting with more agile 2.7.x releases and would like to continue >> the same by volunteering as the RM for 2.8.x too. >> >> Given the long time we took with 2.7.0, the timeline I am looking at is 8-12 >> weeks. We can pick as many features as they finish along and make a more >> predictable releases instead of holding up releases for ever. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Thanks >> +Vinod >
