Considering that we tag a "release" as stable, and only one at a time, how does that quote even relate? To me it's completely orthogonal.
J-D On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > Renaming subject since the discussion may be long. > > Allow me to quote Todd from another email thread: > > bq. I think we should be especially conservative about adding even > non-invasive features to "stable" branches. > > Since 0.94 is considered stable, should the above be applicable ? > > Thanks > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:31 PM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Wait! 0.94 is the current stable release. Did you just re-point the stable >> pointer to 0.92? >> 0.92 is a maintenance release. >> >> Are we telling new users to install 0.92.x or 0.94.x? For sure this should >> be 0.94.x. >> >> >> -- Lars >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Ted Yu <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 3:13 PM >> Subject: Re: ANN: The second hbase 0.92.2 release candidate is available >> for download >> >> I wasn't fully aware of the 3 binding vote rule. >> >> I have restored the symlink. >> >> Cheers >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected] >> >wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > J-D: >> > > So far we have 2 +1 (binding) and 2 +1 (non-binding), no -1 on RC1. >> > > >> > > Do you think I can roll this RC as 0.92.2 ? >> > >> > Looks like you already did yesterday? >> > >> > http://apache.cs.utah.edu/hbase/stable/ >> > >> > J-D >> > >>
