I realize this is a vote thread but I need a satisfactory answer to the below inquiries before feeling comfortable casting a vote. Or perhaps that means we need to cancel this vote and move back to discussion.
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> wrote: > Also after the merge process is completed, do you plan to use git > format-patch to break out the per-JIRA changes into updated patches for > those JIRAs representing in effect the final commit? > > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> >> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Enis Söztutar <e...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> This VOTE is for merging back the remaining changes in branch to trunk. If >>> passes, we will rebase the branch on top of current trunk, in which we >>> will >>> keep the commit-per-issue log history. After that we will do a git merge >>> for the branch keeping the history clean and not squashing the commits. I >>> expect rebasing to be straightforward, however with some manual conflict >>> resolution. After the merge we'll keep running the tests to make sure >>> everything is ok. >>> >> >> Just to clarify that would look something like this: >> >> $ git checkout HBASE-10070 >> $ git rebase --ignore-date master >> (fixups, git add, git rebase --continue, etc, etc, etc) >> $ git checkout master >> $ git merge HBASE-10070 >> >> ? >> >> That sounds good to me, the final merge should be a fast forward merge. >> >> Use of ' --ignore-date' could be mildly controversial. It's not strictly >> necessary because the commits for 10070 will appear grouped in history, but >> then dates on commits will be discontiguous in that section of history. I >> suggest using that option so the order of commits and dates sort the same >> on master. >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Enis Söztutar <e...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Last week we started some discussion[4] for merging branch hbase-10070[1] >>> into trunk. It seems like the consensus there is to do the merge sooner >>> rather than later. >>> >>> >>> We had branched hbase-10070 in Feb out of trunk[5]. The branch contains >>> 55 >>> jiras committed[2]. Out of these 55, 15 has already been committed to >>> trunk >>> and backported to hbase-10070 branch[3]. >>> >>> This VOTE is for merging back the remaining changes in branch to trunk. >>> If >>> passes, we will rebase the branch on top of current trunk, in which we >>> will >>> keep the commit-per-issue log history. After that we will do a git merge >>> for the branch keeping the history clean and not squashing the commits. I >>> expect rebasing to be straightforward, however with some manual conflict >>> resolution. After the merge we'll keep running the tests to make sure >>> everything is ok. >>> >>> An overview of the changes, and the status of the work can be found under >>> [4], [6] and [7].In summary, with the code in branch, you can create >>> tables >>> with region replicas, do gets / multi gets and scans using TIMELINE >>> consistency with high availability. Region replicas periodically scan the >>> files of the primary and pick up flushed / committed files. The RPC >>> paths / >>> assignment, balancing etc are pretty stable. However some more >>> performance >>> analysis and tuning is needed. Phase 2 work is being worked on under >>> HBASE-11183, and we have some working prototype for async-replicating and >>> region splits. However, we believe even without those features, this work >>> is useable (especially for read-only/bulk load tables) , and can be >>> released as an experimental feature in 1.0. >>> >>> Please indicate your choice: >>> >>> [ ] +1 on yes, merge branch hbase-10070 to trunk. >>> [ ] 0 on don't care >>> [ ] -1 don't merge, because ... >>> >>> I'll keep the vote running for 7 days, and close it Mon 9th of June, PDT. >>> >>> Here is my official +1. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Enis >>> >>> [1] >>> >>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=hbase.git;a=log;h=refs/heads/hbase-10070 >>> [2] >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-11214?jql=fixVersion%20%3D%20hbase-10070%20AND%20project%20%3D%20HBASE%20AND%20status%20%3D%20resolved >>> [3] >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10792?jql=fixVersion%20%3D%20hbase-10070%20and%20fixversion%20%3D%200.99.0%20AND%20project%20%3D%20HBASE%20AND%20status%20%3D%20resolved >>> [4] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@hbase.apache.org/msg25795.html >>> [5] >>> >>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/commit/e22c7efeac02efde3451a0c9ff9bdcd2725576d0 >>> [6] >>> >>> http://www.slideshare.net/enissoz/hbase-high-availability-for-reads-with-time >>> [7] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10070 >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> >> - Andy >> >> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein >> (via Tom White) >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) > -- Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
