+1 for reverting it. It doesn't add any new functionality so I don't see the value in including it in the release.
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Henry Robinson <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 for reverting it. It's a recent, major change and it's still settling. > > On 5 January 2017 at 10:49, Jim Apple <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Yes, that is in the branch: > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-impala. > > git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/branch-2.8.0 > > > > Here are some options: > > > > 1. Burn this branch, make a new one without the commit but with > > everything else. Pros: no blocker. Cons: cherry-picking hell. > > > > 2. Take the branch before this commit. Pros: no blocker. Cons: missing > > other bug fixes > > > > 3. Wait for a fix. Pros: no blocker. Cons: delay > > > > 4. Commit to master a git revert of that patch. Pros: no blocker; > > fixes blocker on branch and master. Cons: add noise to commit history > > > > I'd like to git revert it. What do you all think? > > > > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Tim Armstrong <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > This one: > > > > > > http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/4418 > > > > > > On 5 Jan 2017 10:15 AM, "Jim Apple" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> Which commit introduced it? > > >> > > >> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Tim Armstrong < > [email protected] > > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > I think we have some open blockers for 2.8. Or at least one that was > > >> > introduced in a recent commit . > > >> > https://issues.cloudera.org/browse/IMPALA-4707. Do we plan to > > include a > > >> fix > > >> > or just exclude the commit that introduced it? > > >> > > > >> > On 5 Jan 2017 9:09 AM, "Jim Apple" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > I have now also tested the docs build: > > >> > http://jenkins.impala.io:8080/view/Utility/job/docs-build/92/ > > >> > > > >> > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:28 AM, Jim Apple <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >> >> I have now tested this hash (4fa9270e647b9c097295dcc13d9713 > > 6cca3139ad) > > >> >> on public Jenkins: > > >> >> > > >> >> http://jenkins.impala.io:8080/view/Utility/job/parallel-all- > > tests/130/ > > >> >> http://jenkins.impala.io:8080/view/Utility/job/ubuntu-14.04- > > >> > from-scratch/434/ > > >> >> http://jenkins.impala.io:8080/view/Utility/job/ubuntu-14.04- > > >> > from-scratch/435/ > > >> >> http://jenkins.impala.io:8080/view/Utility/job/ubuntu-14.04- > > >> > from-scratch/436/ > > >> >> > > >> >> That covers RAT (the tool for checking copyright compliance), > various > > >> >> build options (including ninja, release, asan, shared libs), > loading > > >> >> the data from scratch and running all tests in core and in > > exhaustive, > > >> >> clang-tidy, and the build we instruct IPMC release testers to run > > >> >> (bin/bootstrap_build.sh). > > >> >> > > >> >> I have also created a git branch: > > >> >> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-impala. > > >> > git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/branch-2.8.0 > > >> >> > > >> >> I am working on a commit to add a disclaimer to the docs > > >> >> (https://gerrit.cloudera.org/#/c/5610/) and then I will upload a > > >> >> release candidate tarball. > > >> >> > > >> >> Please prepare yourself to vote. Instructions are here: > > >> >> > > >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IMPALA/ > > >> > DRAFT%3A+How+to+Release#DRAFT:HowtoRelease- > > HowtoVoteonaReleaseCandidate > > >> >> > > >> >> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Jim Apple <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >> >>>> I'd figure out a way to add a big caveat to the docs. Maybe on > the > > >> > landing > > >> >>>> page? Even better if there's a template we can add a caveat to > that > > >> > appears > > >> >>>> on every page. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> I like this idea. I'll prepare a patch for the landing page. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> I don't think there is a simple way to do it on every page. John, > > >> >>> Laurel, am I wrong abut that? > > >> > > > > > > -- > Henry Robinson > Software Engineer > Cloudera > 415-994-6679 >
