Hi Josh, I'd prefer we maintain the simple "traffic light" labels for our compatibility. I'm confused about what the difference might be between "NP" and "X". I'm also confused how there can be any label with less functionality than "X".
-n On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 at 08:12 Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: > Mich T had cross-posted a question to users@{hbase,phoenix} the only > day. After some more information, we were able to find out that Mich was > trying to use Hadoop 3.1 with HBase 1.2.6 > > After pointing Mich to the compatibility table[1], I was about to puff > out my chest and say "look! this table could've told you that HBase > 1.2.6 wouldn't work with Hadoop 3.x!" > > But, then I realized that we don't have a single entry for HBase that > implies it would even work for Hadoop 3. We presently have the following: > > "S" = supported > "X" = not supported > "NT" = Not tested > > I propose that would should add another "value" for cells in the table > to better represent "Works, but not battle-tested" or similar. That > would make possible values: > > "S" = supported > "NP" = not production ready > "X" = not supported > "NT" = not tested > > Furthermore, the word "supported" drives me up a wall (as I think it > implies the wrong mindset for an open source community), and I would > rather see "functional". e.g. > > "F" = Fully functional, production ready > "NP" = Functional, but not production ready/has known issues > "X" = Not functional, lacking basic ability > "NT" = Not tested, functionality is unknown > > Thoughts? Things that I've missed? > > - Josh > > [1] http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hadoop >
