Hi,

My two cents: If developers need to submit their changes into two branches,
then I would vote to hold of another couple of weeks, as Roberta mentions.
If we can do a wholesale merge of 1.2.0 into the new hbase1.0 distro, then
splitting now would be fine.

Thanks,

Hans

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Roberta Marton <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Realistically, it will take another couple of weeks to put all the pieces
> together and release our first tarball to the test site for release 1.2.0.
> After we get the source released, it may be a couple of more weeks to get
> it
> through the Apache process.
> But, if everything thing goes like clockwork, it could be less time.
>
>      Roberta
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Birdsall [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2015 10:23 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Start another branch for HBase 1.0 support
>
> What is the proposed timing?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Varnau [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2015 10:15 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Start another branch for HBase 1.0 support
>
> Trafodion Developers,
>
>
>
> We are working toward our first release (1.2) under Incubator project.
> Meanwhile, folks are starting work on supporting HBase 1.x for future
> release. So I’d like to propose we start another branch to support both
> lines of work.
>
>
>
> If we do that, it does imply some extra overhead for changes that apply to
> both lines of work. Each developer will have to submit change to each
> branch, or someone will need to occasionally merge all the 1.2 work
> forward.
> Given that each developer would know their change-set the best they should
> be the ones to submit it to each branch.
>
>
>
> **Given that overhead, do you agree that it is time to start another
> branch?**
>
>
>
> Strategy we’ve used in past is to put the imminent release on a side branch
> (e.g., stable/1.2) that can be used to stabilize code for release and for
> any post-release patches. Which would allow new feature development to
> continue on master branch.
>
>
>
> If majority of changes are still going to be aimed for 1.2 release for some
> time to come, we could keep 1.2 on master branch and have a temporary
> feature branch for hbase1.0, but my proposal is to go ahead to create
> stable/1.2 and allow next release work to come into master branch.
>
>
>
> **Do you agree to create stable/1.2, and open master branch for net release
> features?**
>
>
>
> Let me know what you think. I’ll work on setting up build & test automation
> to support two branches.
>
>
>
> --Steve
>

Reply via email to