+1 make it happen if it hasnt yet :-)
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Jonathan Gray <jg...@facebook.com> wrote: > 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 >
