Patches for HBASE-10467 and HBASE-10460 have been checked in. Cheers
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com>wrote: > I was going to roll a new RC now that the tag compression fix was in. No > problem to wait for these if they are going in today. > > > > On Feb 4, 2014, at 3:22 PM, Enis Söztutar <enis....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > We need a new RC anyway it seems. I say we fix HBASE-10460 and the HTD > issues in the new RC and be at least do best effort thing. I guess we can > get both of these committed today. > > > > Enis > > > > > >> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> The other issue Alex reported doesn't need to be fixed because > >> HTableDescriptor is marked @InterfaceStability.Evolving, right ? > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Andrew Purtell < > andrew.purt...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> > >> > I am not arguing the minor patches in question. Put them in. What I am > >> > saying is voting -1 on a release because of binary compatibility > issues > >> > misses the earlier discussion where the consensus was not to do that. > >> > > >> > > On Feb 4, 2014, at 2:46 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <j...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > Andrew, > >> > > > >> > > I basically agree with lars here -- the ship has sailed here. > However, > >> > there are some patches that restored binary compat in places > committed to > >> > 0.98 already. (IMO actually this would be an argument to fork > earlier in > >> > the future) > >> > > > >> > > I have some comments on HBASE-10460. Specifically it is on a class > that > >> > is @InterfaceAudience.Public and @InterfaceStability.Stable -- and I > think > >> > they fix there should get into 0.98. > >> > > > >> > > Jon. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 9:46 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> > >> My $0.02... > >> > >> > >> > >> Wire (client-server and server-server) compatibility is a must > have. > >> > >> Binary compatibility should be a best effort. I.e. we shouldn't go > out > >> > of our way to break things, but if we want to clean up an API we > should do > >> > that. > >> > >> So much for 0.98. > >> > >> > >> > >> Going forward... > >> > >> > >> > >> Once we go past version 1.0 and to semantic versioning this will > need a > >> > bigger discussion. > >> > >> > >> > >> As discussed in the past there are at least four angles here: > >> > >> 1. Client-server wire compatibility > >> > >> 2. Server-server wire compatibility > >> > >> 3. Client binary compatibility > >> > >> 4. Server interface binary compatibility (for coprocessors) > >> > >> > >> > >> #4 is surprisingly important as it basically turns into a #1 > problem > >> > when a project ships with coprocessors. > >> > >> > >> > >> Then we need to define compatibility rules for major/minor/patch > >> > versions. > >> > >> In the last PMC meeting we had a start on this. We need to finish > the > >> > details. > >> > >> > >> > >> -- Lars > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> > >> From: Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > >> > >> To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <dev@hbase.apache.org> > >> > >> Cc: > >> > >> Sent: Monday, February 3, 2014 3:08 PM > >> > >> Subject: Binary API compatibility is not a requirement for any 0.98 > >> > release candidate > >> > >> > >> > >> If you would like to change this consensus now, we can do so, and > add > >> > it as > >> > >> a release criterion. That would require undoing the comparator > cleanups > >> > and > >> > >> related breaking changes that went in as HBASE-9245 and subtasks. > So > >> > let's > >> > >> not. I am -1 on making a change like this late in the day, after > we have > >> > >> already had two RCs and I am hoping to get a third out tomorrow. > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> > >> > >> - Andy > >> > >> > >> > >> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - > Piet Hein > >> > >> (via Tom White) > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > -- > >> > > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay) > >> > > // HBase Tech Lead, Software Engineer, Cloudera > >> > > // j...@cloudera.com // @jmhsieh > >> > > > >> > > > >
