> On Feb 9, 2016, at 6:27 PM, Junping Du <j...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Yongjun for identifying and proposing this change to 2.6.4. I think
> this is the right thing to do and check for following releases. For 2.6.4, it
> seems unnecessary to create another release candidate for this issue as we
> only kicking off a new RC build when last RC has serious problem in
> functionality. The vote progress is quite smoothly so far, so it seems
> unlikely that we will create a new RC. However, I think there are still two
> options here:
> Option 1: in final build, adopt change of HDFS-9629 that only updates the
> footer of Web UI to show year 2016.
> Option 2: skip HDFS-9629 for 2.6.4 and adopt it later for 2.6.5.
> I prefer Option 1 as this is a very low risky change without affecting any
> functionality, and we allow non-functional changes (like release date, etc.)
> happen on final build after RC passed. I would like to hear the voices in
> community here before acting for the next step. Thoughts?
>
I’d think having PMC votes apply to what is not actually the final
artifact is against the ASF rules.
