We have 3 +1s from PMC... I'm going to push the 1.4.6 release artifacts. Thanks Gwen for finding the issue and every one for jumping in!
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Abraham Elmahrek <[email protected]> wrote: > Hmm let's close this thread. Do we need an official vote thread? Or can we > move forward without it? > > On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 12:49 PM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> +1 on continuing with the release without 0.20 artifacts >> >> The Hadoop 0.20 profile is actually not Apache Hadoop 0.20, it’s specific >> to CDH3 instead [1]. It’s there from the time when Sqoop was Cloudera >> project running on github and we’ve just not updated it since then. Knowing >> that those bits might not work on pure Apache Hadoop 0.20, I would even go >> as far as dropping that profile completely if nobody objects. >> >> Jarcec >> >> Links: >> 1: https://github.com/apache/sqoop/blob/trunk/build.xml#L126 >> >> > On May 4, 2015, at 11:40 AM, Venkat Ranganathan < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > +1. Good work identifying this Gwen. >> > >> > If this is an issue, we can remedy it in 1.4.7 >> > >> > Venkat >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On 5/4/15, 11:29 AM, "Abraham Elmahrek" <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> I'm +1 on this. I doubt there are many users of 0.20 these days. >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Gwen Shapira <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Hi Sqoop Developers, >> >>> >> >>> There was a slight oversight on my part as a release mentor and Sqoop >> 1.4.6 >> >>> passed a vote with 0.20 artifacts missing. >> >>> >> >>> I suggest that since the vote passed, we can release the artifacts we >> voted >> >>> on, even though 0.20 is missing. Under the assumption that if 0.20 was >> >>> critical, the issue would be raised during the voting process (I >> believe >> >>> 0.20 is pretty much extinct by now). >> >>> >> >>> Any objections? >> >>> >> >>> Gwen >> >>> >> >> >
