I'm curious what will be the policy for security commits? I plan to take all security changes into 0.98. If we have commits to master and 0.98 that will result in a serious feature / functionality discontinuity.
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Enis Söztutar <[email protected]> wrote: > I've pushed the branch, named branch-1: > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=hbase.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/branch-1 > > Please do not commit new features to branch-1 without pinging the RM (for > 1.0 it is me). Bug fixes, and trivial commits can always go in. > > That branch still has 0.99.0-SNAPSHOT as the version number, since next > expected release from that is 0.99.0. Jenkins build for this branch is > setup at https://builds.apache.org/view/All/job/HBase-1.0/. It builds with > latest jdk7. I'll try to stabilize the unit tests for the first RC. > > I've changed the master version as well. It now builds with 2.0.0-SNAPSHOT. > Exciting! > > Enis > > > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Kevin O'dell <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > HURRAY! > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Enis Söztutar <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Devs, > > > > > > I will be creating the branch named "branch-1" in a couple of hours > (see > > > previous threads [1],[2],[3]. > > > > > > We have agreed to go with the branching structure that will look like > > this: > > > > > > master (2.0-SNAPSHOT) > > > | > > > | branch-1 (1.1-SNAPSHOT) > > > | | > > > | | branch-1.0 (1.0.1-SNAPSHOT) > > > | | | > > > | | x (1.0.0) > > > | | | > > > | |/ > > > | x (0.99.1) > > > | | > > > | x (0.99.0) > > > | | > > > |/ > > > > > > > > > This structure will give us flexibility to have both multiple active > 1.x > > > releases, and have 2.0 patches to be committable. And also we can use > > > semantic versioning for our releases from now on [4]. > > > > > > For now, the repo will look like as below, and before 1.0.0, branch-1.0 > > > will be forked from branch-1 and the tree will more like as above. > > > > > > > > > master (2.0-SNAPSHOT) > > > | > > > | branch-1 (0.99.0-SNAPSHOT) > > > | | > > > | | > > > |/ > > > > > > > > > As a reminder, 0.99.0 release and any more releases in 0.99.x release > > will > > > be labeled as "developer releases" as a way to prepare for 1.0.0. > 0.99.x > > > will NOT have any forward / backward compatibility guarantees and not > > > intended for production. I aim to get the 0.99.0RC0 cut by end of this > > > week. We should only accept patches relevant to 1.0.0 release to the > > > branch-1 from now on. On that note, it will be good to re-kindle the > > > interest in jiras around > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10856 > > > . > > > Please feel free to pick up any issue that you consider important to > fix > > > for HBase-1.0 release. > > > > > > Jira labels: > > > - I've created 2.0.0 label in jira. We now have 0.99.0, 1.0.0, and > 2.0.0 > > > labels corresponding to branches in progress. If you commit anything to > > > master, please mark the jira with 2.0.0 label. > > > > > > Jenkins builds: > > > - I'll set up a build for HBase-1.0 using JDK-1.7. > > > > > > > > > Your RM, Enis > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201406.mbox/%3CCADcMMgEhM1rN4AsazErDAUqXO5fcCbgcRz%2B2nDXo9q2CQL%3D7jg%40mail.gmail.com%3E > > > > > > [2] > > > > > > > > > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201406.mbox/%3CCAMUu0w-qWXnHRewuqo1NpSnD6Kj0aad9LcmyuLJ%3DskQ8Ut9sYw%40mail.gmail.com%3E > > > > > > [3] > > > > > > > > > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201406.mbox/%3CCAMUu0w-3rkvabadvkYtfjiE24yr-wKLx0%2BcXEvcFTyK1VSiDBQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E > > > > > > [4] http://semver.org/ > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Kevin O'Dell > > Systems Engineer, Cloudera > > > -- Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
