That's the plan. Thanks guys.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Todd Lipcon [mailto:t...@cloudera.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:30 PM > To: dev@hbase.apache.org > Subject: Re: Feature branch for master rewrite > > +1, sounds good to me, too. > > But let's please make sure there are periodic merges from trunk into > the > feature branch, so that we don't have merge hell in a month when we > want to > merge back! > > -Todd > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans > <jdcry...@apache.org>wrote: > > > Supportive +1, it's hard for us to see the big picture through the > > stream of patches and I think creating that branch goes hand in hand > > with what was said at the Hadoop Contributors meetup (not that we are > > tied to what was said there, but I remember that we all agreed that > it > > was a good model for HBase too). > > > > J-D > > > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Jonathan Gray <jg...@facebook.com> > wrote: > > > Hey guys, > > > > > > So it's been a clunky and slow-moving process with HBASE-2694 and > related > > JIRAs. > > > > > > The most recent HBASE-2697 patch is supposed to be non- > controversial but > > is in fact controversial because there's really not much context to > the > > changes. > > > > > > Instead of trying to make smallish patches that are each > individually > > reviewable, the consensus is that we should make a feature branch so > that > > our ideas can be seen through but still in a public forum. In the > end we'll > > end up with a branch which can be independently tested, a series of > patches > > that got us here, and incremental (but non-blocking) reviews along > the way. > > > > > > Unless there is major opposition I'm going to cut the branch > tonight. > > > > > > JG > > > > > > > > > -- > Todd Lipcon > Software Engineer, Cloudera
