+1 on the below. St.Ack
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Dhruba Borthakur <[email protected]> wrote: > I will try to explain my opinion on some of the questions being raised so > far. Of course all these are open for discussion and nothing is final at > this moment. > > 1. This code base is primarily targeted for usage by HBase and Scribe. Both > of these are Apache open source projects. > 2. Accordingly, my proposal is to name the branch hadoop-0.20-append. This > name is more generic than the earlier one I suggested. > 3. The proposal to pull patches into this branch will follow normal > conventions that we follow in Hadoop. However, the release manager would > have an option to veto a patch from being pulled into the branch. > 4. if this type of branching causes too many forks of core Hadoop, then we > can aim to merge some of them after some time. The time duration depends on > the stability of the code in that particular branch and is difficult to > predict. The PMC, of course, has to approve of any new branch; so, in effect > can prevent undesired multiple forks if that becomes a problem in the > future. > 5. code changes to this new branch will go through the normal process via > JIRAs, code reviews, unit tests, etc. > 6. the goal is to have a standard hadoop release from this branch at some > future point. if course, such a release has to be approved by the PMC. The > release could be marked as "experimental" or some such thing if deemed > appropriate by the PMC. > > thanks, > dhruba > > > On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 3:15 PM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Should it be all of hadoop? Could it be hdfs only? >> > >> >> Please ignore the above question (I just took a look at 0.20 repo). >> St.Ack >> > > > > -- > Connect to me at http://www.facebook.com/dhruba >
