I think it is expected that we have more patch releases for minor releases like 2.0.x and 1.1.x. As a new major release is expected to be unstable in the beginning.
Even if we want to retire 2.0.x ASAP, I still think we need a have a 2.0.1 release... Stack <st...@duboce.net>于2018年6月4日 周一12:16写道： > On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 8:54 PM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > What;s your plan sir? Branch branch-2.1 from branch-2.0? > > > > > Its a suggestion. > > I like Andrew's notion that we left-shift how we have been thinking about > version numbers; that we releases tend toward minor increments rather than > patch increments as we have been doing up to this. > > If we are going to act on Andrew's suggestion, now is the time to do it. > > 2.0.0 was rough. 2.1.0 could be branched from branch-2.0 being 2.0.0 but > with 100+ bug and perf fixes. I could even see folks deploying a 2.1.0 in > production. Perhaps there'll be a 2.2.0 and a 2.3.0. They'll be boring bug > and perf improvements only. > > We already have enough to define a substantial 3.0.0 IMO what with serial > replication and HBASE-20312 CCSMap. > > I'm trying to avoid 3.0.0 being like 2.0.0 where it takes years for it to > ship. Meantime we accumulate a mountain of testing, perf, and whatever else > tech debt. > > What do folks think? > > Thanks, > S > > > > > > 2018-06-04 11:50 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>: > > > > > On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 5:36 PM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Will cut the 2.1 branch tomorrow if no objections. The unfinished > > > features > > > > will be disabled by default or purged from branch-2.1 and target to > 2.2 > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > > I was thinking that the next release off branch-2.0 could be 2.1.0. It > > has > > > 70+ commits including a big boost in perf. It feels more like a minor > > > release than it does a point release. > > > > > > Branch 3.0.0 rather than 2.1.0 Duo? > > > > > > S > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2018-05-17 14:19 GMT+08:00 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > Plan to cut branch-2.1 at the end of May. Will consider the status > of > > > the > > > > > new features at that time to determine what will be released with > > 2.1.x > > > > > release line. > > > > > > > > > > 2018-05-08 10:16 GMT+08:00 Josh Elser <els...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > > >> Big big big +1 > > > > >> > > > > >> (Came in to say just this but you beat me to it :D) > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On 5/7/18 12:07 AM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >>> Let's do big features in 3.0.0 only. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Ideally there will no big new features for a minor release, so > that > > > we > > > > >>> can > > > > >>> move the stable pointer to newer minor versions quickly and > retire > > > the > > > > >>> old > > > > >>> branches. It will be a nightmare if we have lots of active minor > > > > release > > > > >>> lines... > > > > >>> > > > > >>> 2018-05-07 14:53 GMT+08:00 Guanghao Zhang <zghao...@gmail.com>: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Why 2.1 doesn't contatin synchronous replication? This can be a > > > > >>>> experiment > > > > >>>> feature in 2.1? > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> 2018-05-07 14:41 GMT+08:00 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com > >: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> 2018-05-07 14:38 GMT+08:00 Chia-Ping Tsai <chia7...@apache.org > >: > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> As I volunteered to be the release manager for the 2.1 release > > line > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> so > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>> let > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> me bring this up. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> +1 to Duo be RM of 2.1 release. > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> disabled from 2.0.0 release, for example, serial replication, > > and > > > in > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> memory compaction > > > > >>>>>> IIRC, in memory compaction is enabled in 2.0 and the default > > > policy > > > > is > > > > >>>>>> BASIC. (please correct me if I misunderstand something.) > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> We disabled it by default in the end due to some performance > > > > issues... > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>>> For the 2.1 release line, I would like to define it as the > > 'real' > > > > 2.x > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> Seems the release date between 2.0 and 2.1 will be very close. > > Is > > > it > > > > >>>>>> related to our new release plan? (IIRC, Andrew had suggested > > some > > > > >>>>>> great > > > > >>>>>> release plan based time. But I fail to find the thread...) > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> And for the 3.0.0 release, I think the new features should be > > > > decided > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> ASAP. > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> We need to avoid the same thing happens again, i.e, spending > 2 > > > > years > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> to > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>> release a major version... > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> agreed! > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> On 2018/05/07 00:52:07, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> As I volunteered to be the release manager for the 2.1 > release > > > line > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> so > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>> let > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> me bring this up. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> For the 2.1 release line, I would like to define it as the > > 'real' > > > > 2.x > > > > >>>>>>> version of HBase. It should include the features which are > > > reverted > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> or > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>> disabled from 2.0.0 release, for example, serial replication, > and > > > in > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> memory > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> compaction. And also, the performance issues. And no more new > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> features. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>> If > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> no objections, I will start the release work soon. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> And for the 3.0.0 release, I think the new features should be > > > > decided > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> ASAP. > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> We need to avoid the same thing happens again, i.e, spending > 2 > > > > years > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> to > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>> release a major version... > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> For now, the new features > > > > >>>>>>> Synchronous replication > > > > >>>>>>> CCSMap > > > > >>>>>>> Backup > > > > >>>>>>> Spark connector(is it still active?) > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> And I suggest that we include this: > > > > >>>>>>> The read path refactoring(HBASE-20525) > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> Suggestions are welcomed. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> Thanks. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
