I think changing the connection "identity" handling is a pretty major
change, and I'd be uncomfortable pushing it out in a point release before
it's had time to be adequately tested.  It's not even in the 0.90 branch
yet.  If we're trying to get out a 0.90.3 release sooner than later, then it
doesn't seem to fit the bill.

FYI, I only see one reference to HBASE-3777 on the user list:
http://search-hadoop.com/m/VYHN4QbRQ2

It may be solving real problems that people are having (I hope so!), but I
don't see any clamoring for it to prevent a 0.90.3-rc.

--gh


On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote:

> The possibility of HBASE-3777 creating bigger trouble than without is low,
> in my opinion.
> Maybe we should conduct a poll in user mailing list and count the votes.
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]
> >wrote:
>
> > > Actually these two actions are related.
> > > I can imagine the disappointment among hbase users if HBASE-3777
> weren't
> > > included in 0.90.3
> >
> > I can also imagine the disappointment if we release a 0.90.3 that
> > contains more bugs than it fixes, it goes both ways. Moreover,
> > HBASE-3777 wasn't targeted and still isn't targeted for 0.90.3, so I
> > don't see how even if someone paid attention to the jira they would
> > expect to see it in 0.90.3
> >
> > I'd like to state that I'm not trying to discredit the work that was
> > done in that Jira, it was a perfect example of open source
> > collaboration, but I'm rather trying to point out that it's a big
> > change and that the bigger the change the better the chances are that
> > there will be bugs lurking in it. You could easily list big patches
> > that were committed to point releases in the past and I would agree
> > with you that this is something we've done, but I can also recall a
> > number of those changes that introduced more bugs and even made some
> > releases unusable (like 0.20.4). Let's try to learn from our errors.
> >
> > Finally, even if it's not in 0.90.3, the fact that a backport be made
> > available means that people can patch it in themselves or that other
> > distros can decide to include it (like in the next CDH3 update). And
> > finally we could do a 0.90.4 with it.
> >
> > J-D
> >
>

Reply via email to