Remeber that the shim layer will continue to exist. This is something I would consider:
In 6 months from day x hive will no longer default to building against hadoop 0.20. Hadoop 0.20.x will not be officially supported, meaning that our build bots will no longer test against 0.20.x. Compatibility with hadoop 0.20.x will not be a requirement for any patch. The 0.20 shims will still remain in trunk. Committers could still accept patches to support 0.20 as long as they are not detrimental to current supported versions. What this would mean is if i checked out hive trunk in 5 months and 29 days after day x it would still build , compile , and run on hadoop 0.20 and be feature complete. At the 6 month mark i lose that guarantee. On Thursday, September 19, 2013, Edward Capriolo <edlinuxg...@gmail.com> wrote: > "+1 to dropping Hadoop 0.20.2 support in Hive 0.13, which given that Hive > 0.12 has just branched means it isn't likely that Hive 0.13 will come out > in the next 6 months." > > LOL > -1. I was not suggesting we drop 0.20.2 support now, so the next hive version 0.13 won't have it. That would essentially mean we are dropping it now. > > I was suggesting dropping the 0.20.2 support in 6 months, so whatever version STARTED won't have it. > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Owen O'Malley <omal...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> +1 to dropping Hadoop 0.20.2 support in Hive 0.13, which given that Hive >> 0.12 has just branched means it isn't likely that Hive 0.13 will come out >> in the next 6 months. >> >> -- Owen >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Brock Noland <br...@cloudera.com> wrote: >> >> > First off, I have to apologize, I didn't know there would be such >> > passions on both sides of the 0.20.2 argument! >> > >> > On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Edward Capriolo < edlinuxg...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > That rant being done, >> > >> > No worries man, Hadoop versions are something worth ranting about. >> > IMHO Hadoop has a history of changing API's and breaking end users. >> > However, I feel this is improving. >> > >> > > we can not and should not support hadoop 0.20.2 >> > > forever. Discontinuing hadoop 0.20.2 in say 6 months might be reasonable, >> > > but I think dropping it on the floor due to a one line change for a >> > missing >> > > convenience constructor is a bit knee-jerk. >> > >> > Very sorry if I came across with the opinion that we should "drop >> > 0.20.2 now" because of the constructor issue. The issue brought up >> > 0.20.2's age in my mind and the logical next step is to ask how long >> > we plan on supporting it! :) I like the time bounding idea and I feel >> > 6 months is reasonable. FWIW, the 1.X series is stable for my needs. >> > >> > Brock >> > > >
