I think the requirements so far are fair enough (UT, doc). Other than assignment, there is nothing in the patch that touches core code (which is by design). So the risk is pretty low.
We can do the backport and have a couple of ITBLL + ITLAV runs with CM to verify the stability. Enis On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Sean Busbey <bus...@cloudera.com> wrote: > I'd like to see the docs issue (HBASE-14856) handled before we backport to > a release line. Getting the added integration test on the nightly build > would also be good. > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Francis Liu <tof...@ymail.com.invalid> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > HBASE-6721 is now committed to trunk. It'd be great if it can be > > backported to 1.x and 0.98 so that we can use it internally as well as > push > > up features and fixes. We have been running an internal version for > around > > 4 years. There's seems to be interest (HW, Bloomberg, Salesforce, etc). > > Also given how modular the code is. There's barely any effect in existing > > code paths. > > Seeding the criteria with Andy's suggestions in jira: > > 1. Stability - Unit tests and ?2. functional3. Performance - Read/write > > path was not affected. Some small changes related to assignment. > > Thanks, > > Francis > > > > > > > > > > > -- > busbey >
