By compatibility, I just meant review this doc and think about how it impacts your change.
https://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning I do have an open TODO item for running API compat on PRs, but we're not there yet. On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 11:28 AM Daniel Roudnitsky (BLOOMBERG/ 919 3RD A) <droudnits...@bloomberg.net> wrote: > > Thank you Duo and Nick for your replies, I will create a release note and a > backport PR, some quick process questions here: > 1. For the branch-2 backport for targeting 2.7+, it is not a clean > backport/cherry-pick, should the backport PR be tied to a separate jira > issue? I have seen this being done in the project. > 2. Is compatibility check just a matter of running checkcompatibility.py? > > I can also add the answers to these two questions to the developer guide in > the HBase reference if we feel that is appropriate. > > Thank you, > Daniel > > From: dev@hbase.apache.org At: 11/07/24 01:18:05 UTC-5:00To: > dev@hbase.apache.org > Subject: Re: Proposal to change meta operation timeout default - HBASE-28608 > > I think this could also go into branch-2, but not branch-2.6 since it > introduces some behavior changes. > > Please also fill the release note. > > I will merge this soon. > > Thanks for your patience Daniel. > > Nick Dimiduk <ndimi...@apache.org> 于2024年11月7日周四 02:42写道： > > > > Hi Daniel, > > > > I haven’t had much time for community work lately. You’re on my todo list. > > I don’t remember the details of this PR, but you can stay ahead of the devs > > by checking the API compat and determine if the change will backport to > > branch-2. If so, make sure your work back-ports via simply cherry-pick, and > > if not, post up a backport PR. > > > > I’ll try to get to your PR before the end of the week. > > > > Thanks, > > Nick > > > > On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 at 12:51, Daniel Roudnitsky (BLOOMBERG/ 919 3RD A) < > > droudnits...@bloomberg.net> wrote: > > > > > Hello Committers, > > > > > > The proposal received no concerns and has 3 (scattered) +1s: > > > +1 in the thread below > > > +1 in the PR > > > https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/6000#issuecomment-2183737439 > > > +1 in the jira issue > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-28608?focusedCommentId=17886921&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment- > 17886921 > > > > > > Thank you to everyone for their feedback and review, given the support and > > > lack of any concerns voiced, with the PR already approved, can this be > > > committed, or is there anything else I can do to get this change > > > committed? > > > > > > Thank you, > > > Daniel > > > > > > From: dev@hbase.apache.org At: 10/14/24 11:33:05 UTC-4:00To: > > > dev@hbase.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: Proposal to change meta operation timeout default - > > > HBASE-28608 > > > > > > Thank you Nick, Ray, Duo for feedback on the proposal, the current state > > > is > > > that it has three +1s and PR is open and approved - > > > https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/6000 > > > > > > From: dev@hbase.apache.org At: 10/08/24 06:41:32 UTC-4:00To: > > > dev@hbase.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: Proposal to change meta operation timeout default - > > > HBASE-28608 > > > > > > Hi Daniel, > > > > > > I think that this change makes sense -- an unconfigured client meta > > > request > > > timeout should fall-back to the client request timeout -- however it is > > > configured. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Nick > > > > > > On 2024/10/01 20:15:15 "Daniel Roudnitsky (BLOOMBERG/ 919 3RD A)" wrote: > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > > > > > In HBASE-28608 I proposed a change to the default meta operation > > > timeout, a > > > behavioral change to the client. As its a behavioral change to the client > > > I was > > > suggested to start a dev list thread to get more opinions on the proposal > > > (thank you Duo for suggestion and review). I would appreciate any reviews > > > on > > > this issue - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-28608 > > > > > > > > Thank you all, > > > > Daniel Roudnitsky > > > > > > > > > > >
