Ok, looks like there is some enough feelings that we don't need to worry about downgrades.
What about the other part of Sean's question? Do we need to support rolling upgrades to 2.0 from any 1.x, or is it fair game to require a specific minimum version? If we felt that it simplified things, I'd even be happy with a minimum 1.4->2.0 upgrade path, but 1.4 doesn't exist yet and I don't feel like that's something we can dictate to users. Maybe it's ok to set the minimum line at 1.2? If we end up moving the stable pointer, that makes for a stronger argument for a newer minimum version. Mike On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Josh Elser <josh.el...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 -- well put, Andrew. > > > On 10/28/17 1:17 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > >> I would not like to see downgrades as a goal. This would be new. We've >> not done it before. Laudible goal, but we are clearly stretched already. >> >> >> On Oct 28, 2017, at 10:08 AM, Mike Drob <md...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> If downgrades are a later goal, does that mean somebody could go from >>> some >>> 1.x to 2.0 to 2.y then back to 1.x? >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Sean Busbey <bus...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> I'd like to make downgrades a non-goal. I'd love us to support >>>> downgrades eventually, but that's a feature in its own right and I >>>> don't think we have time to get it done and still have a 2.0.0 GA in a >>>> reasonable time frame. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:40 PM, Sean Busbey <bus...@apache.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> A recent JIRA about our hfile format[1] has got me thinking about >>>>> expectations for upgrading. The specifics of that JIRA aren't terribly >>>>> important; it's the general issue I want to talk about. A >>>>> simplification of the mismatch in expectations between two groups is >>>>> that some folks place the bar for "we support rolling upgrade" at >>>>> rolling upgrade from 1.y.z* versions generally and others are >>>>> comfortable requiring an initial upgrade to some later 1.y.z version >>>>> first. >>>>> >>>>> Have we documented what our goals are for upgrades this major release? >>>>> Do we know what we have to do to get there? I've seen a few one-off >>>>> JIRAs to fix particular problems, but not really a plan. >>>>> >>>>> We should discuss here a bit. >>>>> >>>>> When things have some consensus is anyone willing to take point on >>>>> writing up the results in a scope document of sorts? I have a few good >>>>> examples to point you to, though they're all for features. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-19052 >>>>> >>>> >>>>
