Hi,

one question from me: how shall we integrate our OYA changes to master?

I can think of four options:
1. Simply git merge our commits from the oya branch. This will mean at
least 20-30 commits.
2. We squash our commits to have fewer and then merge the oya branch (right
now I can't say in advance how many commits we'll end up with)
3. We squash _all_ commits into one and then merge/cherry-pick it.
4. We create a patch file containing all changes and apply it

Ideas, suggestions are welcome.

Peter

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 2:56 AM, Robert Kanter <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Now that Oozie 4.3 is branched and will be happening soon, I imagine the
> next release we do with be Oozie 5 with Oozie On Yarn.  We can continue to
> keep OYA in a feature branch until later when it's more stable so we don't
> disrupt the master branch in the meantime.  We've already removed 0.23 and
> made Hadoop 2 the default.  Removing Hadoop 1 will simplify things, and is
> currently in the way of other tasks like upgrading HBase.  I imagine it
> will continue to do so more as time goes on.
>
> I'd like to propose the following:
>
>    1. Oozie 4.3 is the last release to support Hadoop 1.  If we want to do
>    another Oozie 4.x release later, we can branch it from branch-4.3
> instead
>    of trunk.  Though I expect 4.3 will be the last minor release of Oozie
> 4.
>    2. Oozie 5 (the master branch; aka trunk) will be the first release to
>    support only Hadoop 2 and Hadoop 3 (these should be much more similar
> than
>    Hadoop 1 to 2 was; I expect things will work as-is by just changing the
>    Hadoop version so we probably won't even need profiles).  We'll have
> Oozie
>    On Yarn as the marquee feature.
>    3. We'll drop Hadoop 1 from the master branch.  We can reuse parts
>    of OOZIE-2316.
>    4. The master branch will become 5.0.0-SNAPSHOT instead of
>    4.4.0-SNAPSHOT.
>
> I'd like us to take care of #3 soon, because it's getting in the way.  We
> might as well also take care of #4 soon too.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> thanks
> - Robert
>

Reply via email to