Hi all, Thanks for everyone who voted and provided feedback. This vote passes with +6 and -0.
I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3923 to start tracking the required work and any followup discussion. On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 9:21 AM, Jonathan Eagles <[email protected]> wrote: > +1. > | Thoughts/Inputs/Discussion from Pig/Hive/Flink/Scalding/Scope > communities? > Thanks, Rohini/Gopal/Gunther > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 11:18 AM, Rohini Palaniswamy <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > +1. I don't see a problem for Pig as this is being done mainly for the > > hadoop dependencies conflict and there are no API changes in Tez. At > least > > till we get to the point where we introduce Hadoop 3 specific code into > > Tez, Pig compiled with older versions of Tez will continue to run with > Tez > > master. > > > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 5:33 PM, Gopal Vijayaraghavan <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Gopal > > > > > > > > > On 4/12/18, 5:22 PM, "Eric Wohlstadter" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Just a friendly reminder that this vote is still open. > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 6:33 AM, Jason Lowe <[email protected] > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > There was a discussion thread that was started two weeks before > the > > > > vote thread, see > > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/tez-dev/201803. > > mbox/browser > > > . > > > > Granted there weren't many comments, but there was a discussion > > > thread > > > > with no voiced objections well in advance of the vote thread. > > > > > > > > Jason > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Jonathan Eagles < > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > Thoughts/Inputs/Discussion from Pig/Hive/Flink/Scalding/Scope > > > > communities? > > > > > > > > > > I wish we had used a discussion thread to gather more input > from > > > > > Pig/Hive/Flink/Scalding/Scope community before starting this > vote > > > whose > > > > > outcome affects them. Without discussion or votes from those > > > communities > > > > > I'm not sure the community support for this decision. Should we > > > consider > > > > > canceling this vote to gather input first? > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 10:09 AM, Kuhu Shukla > > > <[email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> +1. > > > > >> > > > > >> Thank you Eric for floating the proposal. > > > > >> > > > > >> Regards, > > > > >> Kuhu > > > > >> > > > > >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:56 AM, Jason Lowe > > <[email protected] > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > +1 > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Jason > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 4:45 PM, Eric Wohlstadter < > > > [email protected]> > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > >> > > Please vote (binding or unbinding) on the following > > proposal. > > > The > > > > vote > > > > >> > will > > > > >> > > be open until 3pm (Pacific) April 13th. > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Proposal: Move master to support minimum Hadoop 3+ (0.10.x > > > line) and > > > > >> > create > > > > >> > > separate branch for Hadoop 2 (0.9.x line) > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Details: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > - Tez master branch would support only Hadoop 3+ moving > > > forward > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > - As a general policy, Maven dependencies on master are > > > required > > > > not > > > > >> > to > > > > >> > > have conflicts with the dependencies of the > corresponding > > > minimum > > > > >> > > supported Hadoop (the dependency versions can vary > > between > > > Tez > > > > >> master > > > > >> > and > > > > >> > > Hadoop if the versions are advertised as compatible by > > the > > > > >> dependency > > > > >> > > provider). > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > - As a general policy, dependency conflicts between Tez > > and > > > > Hadoop > > > > >> > > should be resolved by using compatible jars. > > Shims/Shading > > > could > > > > be > > > > >> > used on > > > > >> > > a case-by-case basis, but not as a general policy. > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > - A separate branch and distribution (e.g. on Maven > > > Central) > > > > will be > > > > >> > > created to maintain the 0.9.x line with minumum support > > for > > > > Hadoop > > > > >> > 2.7.x > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > - Bug fixes would be required to be pushed to both to > > > master and > > > > the > > > > >> > > 0.9.x line (unless they are specific to one of them) > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > - Major feature or performance improvements would be > > > required to > > > > be > > > > >> > > pushed to both master and the 0.9.x line (unless they > > > require > > > > Hadoop > > > > >> > 3+ or > > > > >> > > have dependent library conflicts with Hadoop 2.x, in > > which > > > case > > > > they > > > > >> > may be > > > > >> > > pushed only to master) > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > - Minor feature or performance improvements can be > pushed > > > only to > > > > >> > master > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
