> On Nov 18, 2015, at 12:24 AM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi folks!
>
> How are we doing on moving to an RC?
Other than the blockers, I think we’re looking very good.
> We have three unresolved blockers:
>
> * YETUS-163 - parameterize site for releases - patch available
On my list to review today.
> * YETUS-171 - patches that don't apply don't report back - assigned
I suspect this one is tricky if we also consider “patches” that aren’t
actually patches. I’ll *try* to get to this one today. :(
> * YETUS-186 - non-existent dockerfile should fail - open
I’m going to work on this one today for sure since it’s blocking
something in Hadoop-land.
> Any thing else folks would like to see before we move on the first release?
FWIW, one of our designers is wanting to take a crack at making a new
logo since it was hinted that the quick one I created wasn’t … ideal. Haha.
> How's the Hadoop beta going Allen?
Beta was extremely valuable. A lot of issues came to light that
clarified certain flows, including one or two relatively significant bugs.
That said, the number of issues popping up has slowed tremendously to the point
I’m thinking about new features like cmake support again. Obviously, there
are still a few snags (latest being false positives in javac report), but for
the most part nothing too horrific.
As soon as I get a fix for YETUS-186 written up, I’ll be switching
Hadoop over to use their own Dockerfile. This will allow them to completely
control the environment in which patches get tested from the source tree
itself. It also opens the door for us to slim down ours and make it a base for
others wanting to use the docker functionality. A huge huge win for all parties
involved.
I’m pretty confident that a 0.1.0 release will be able to be used by at
least Hadoop to the point that we’ll likely yank it all out (except
annotations) and replace those components with wrappers to download and use the
Yetus versions. Annotations is a bit trickier for obvious reasons. :)
Woot! I’m excited.
