w.r.t. feature, there is also: HBASE-15968 MVCC-sensitive semantics of versions
On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Stephen Jiang <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, All, > > It is time to discuss about the schedule of HBase 2.0 release. HBase 2.0 > release is a big major release. When we release 1.0, we had 0.99 as dev > preview/beta release. We should do something similar for the 2.0 release. > > Matteo and I talked about this. We think about that we need some > Alpha/Beta milestones before the RC and final Release-to-Web 2.0 release. > > I don't know whether there is any discussion on this community about the > Alpha/Beta release criteria. My proposal is that once we cut the branch-2, > we should only have new features that are absolutely needed for major > release (festures cannot be added in minor release) and those features > should be "almost ready". For Alpha releases, we can still accept these > kind of features; for Beta release, only bug fixes and performance > improvement on existing features (should we also accept existing feature > improvement in Beta? Maybe Beta 1, Not in Beta 2 - that is my take). > > This is a big release and requires a lot of work from Release Manager. I > asked Matteo whether I could help to be some kind of backup / hot-standby / > assistant RM. I think he is very happy to have someone to share some RM > duties. Thus, I will help make this 2.0 release as smooth as possible. > > Here is a tentative plan: > - For now, we are thinking of creating branch-2 middle of this month and > have 2.0-Alpha1 release at the end of this month or begin of Nov. The > definition of Alpha1 is that we could deploy to a cluster and it can do > some simple CRUD and table DDLs; and not crash (of course, UT passing). > > - Then we will have 2.0-Alpha2 in 4-6 weeks after Apha1. It would hold > higher bar. We will run some IT tests to make sure that it would > functional. > > - At that time, we will lock down and not allow any new features, every 4-6 > weeks, we will have a Beta release (my realistic guess is that we would hit > the US Christmas holiday at that time, so first Beta would take longer than > 6 weeks). For Beta release, we would fix bugs and do performance tuning. > Planning to have 2 Betas. (Question: in the past, do we need vote to have > a Beta release?) > > - Once the code are in the stable stage, then we will have RCs and vote for > the final release. > > Please let us know whether this is a reasonable approach that will make the > release successful. > > Currently, we are aware of the following on-going new features for 2.0: new > Assignment Manager, backup/restore, off-heap, protobuff 3, Hybrid Logical > Clock, and maybe AsyncRegion / C++ client). If you have a feature that > wants to be part of 2.0 release, please send discussion to dev community > and we can make a call on accepting/rejecting. > > Thanks > Stephen >
