wow. Wondering how I totally skipped this line :( Sorry. So please disregard my initial email.
Thanks, JM 2014-02-10 13:52 GMT-05:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari < > jean-m...@spaggiari.org> wrote: > > > What's about reducing the default log level? > > > > > Is the above different from '...Ship with default logging level set to > INFO'? > Thanks JMS, > St.Ack > > > > > > > 2014-02-10 12:24 GMT-05:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>: > > > > > Suggestions for 1.0.0 if if it is to come out in next month or so: > > > > > > + Update included libs (e.g. move to log4j2) > > > > > > + Enable distributed log replay as default (fix bugs) > > > + Enable hfilev3 as default. > > > + Ship with default logging level set to INFO and content of the logs > > still > > > makes sense > > > > > > What else? > > > > > > + Enable dynamic config and schema by default. > > > > > > > > > St.Ack > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 4:09 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:52 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I'm happy to volunteer. Happy if Enis does it, too. > > > >> > > > >> > > > > I'd be happy to do it too but my thinking is that it is good to > spread > > > the > > > > role around. > > > > St.Ack > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > >> *From:* Stack <st...@duboce.net> > > > >> *To:* HBase Dev List <dev@hbase.apache.org> > > > >> *Cc:* lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org> > > > >> *Sent:* Monday, January 20, 2014 1:43 PM > > > >> *Subject:* Re: DISCUSSION: 1.0.0 > > > >> > > > >> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Enis Söztutar <e...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> I think whether we will need a new RM will depend on the decision to > > > >> release 1.0 from 0.98 branches or 0.99 branches(current trunk). > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> I think it should have an RM regardless. We should probably try to > > put > > > a > > > >> higher polish on a 1.0 than we would mayhaps on a lesser release. > RM > > > will > > > >> have enough work on their plate just keeping up state (IMO). > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> We can do the previous practice of releasing 0.99.0, then turning > > 0.99.x > > > >> as > > > >> the 1.0.0. In that case, I can also volunteer as well. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Good by me. Anyone else interested in the job? Speak up if so. > > > >> > > > >> If not, you'd get it by default Enis. Else you and whoever will > have > > to > > > >> dook it out. > > > >> > > > >> St.Ack > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
