> Many thanks to those that ran early versions of 0.22, filled issues and 
> provided fixes.

This is one of the three reasons I think 0.22 release is important.
1. A lot of community work has been put into the branch. Developers
were developing, committers were committing, and I heard many
enthusiastic people participated in hackathons. It would be such a
waste.
2. We do not have an Apache release supporting HBase. 0.20.205 is
contemplated to be one. But it will not allow mixed workload. Same as
with other append-based Hadoop versions people will have to use
dedicated HBase clusters separate from "general purpose" clusters.
0.22 is a better choice in this respect.
3. Timing. With 0.23 being de facto a rewrite of Hadoop - both of MR
and HDFS - its stabilization may take longer than anticipated. I
believe 0.22 can be released fairly soon.

I was pleased with recent testing of the 0.22 branch. I plan to set up
a 100-node cluster to test the build with other Hadoop components next
week.

I will very much appreciate any help from the community as I don't
have an army to marshal.

Thanks,
--Konstantin

On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 9:52 PM, Nigel Daley <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Nigel,
>>
>> your comment can be understood as a request to commit important fixes
>> to the 0.22 branch. I agree with that. But if you choose to abandon
>> the RM role I will volunteer to take it over.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Konstantin
>
> [catching up on the week's email]
>
> Konstantin, you are free to carry on this 0.22 work and call a release vote 
> if you wish.
>
> To me it is becoming clearer every week that 0.22 continues to regress in 
> significant ways from 0.20.20x releases which will cause further confusion in 
> our user base.  Thus I will no longer manage a release from the 0.22 branch.  
> When 0.20.200 was proposed, I thought this would be the only such release and 
> regressions to 0.22 would be manageable.  This is no longer the case now that 
> there have been many 0.20.20x releases with significant changes and 
> committers have not been merging these changes to intervening branches as was 
> once common practice.
>
> At the current time, I believe the most value that we (the developer 
> community) have derived from 0.22 was finding/fixing issues throughout the 
> spring timeframe that also existed on trunk.  Many thanks to those that ran 
> early versions of 0.22, filled issues and provided fixes.  Trunk, and thus 
> 0.23, are better for it.
>
> Cheers,
> Nige
>
>
> On Sep 7, 2011, at 2:04 AM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
>
>> Eric,
>>
>> It would take the same amount of resources to fix 0.22 as to merge
>> append and security branches aka 0.20.205.
>> Although I understand that Hortonworks needs to support its
>> customer(s) and is eager to bridge the gap in functionality with its
>> competitor(s), I think continuing with 0.20
>> a-three-years-old-technology is not the best place to invest
>> resources. In the past you advocated for 0.21 and 0.22, both now
>> abandoned by your team(s) in favor of enhancing 0.20. It will be sad
>> to see this backward/forward porting going on forever, diverging the
>> Apache Hadoop project from natural evolutionary process.
>>
>> I think 0.22 has all the functionality required to run Hadoop for most
>> production tasks. I see enough momentum and involvement in the
>> community with 0.22 testing. I think there will be enough resources to
>> get it stabilized in near future.
>>
>> Nigel,
>>
>> your comment can be understood as a request to commit important fixes
>> to the 0.22 branch. I agree with that. But if you choose to abandon
>> the RM role I will volunteer to take it over.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Konstantin
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 4:06 AM, Eric Baldeschwieler
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> What do others think?
>>>
>>> IMO 22 is not the best place to invest resources. I support nigel's 
>>> suggestion of abandoning it, but people are free to work on what they are 
>>> passionate about.
>>>
>>> E14
>>>
>>> On Sep 3, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Nigel Daley wrote:
>>>
>>>> Matt, Others,
>>>>
>>>> Is the expectation that these fixes go into other release branches too 
>>>> (including 0.22, 0.23) if applicable?
>>>>
>>>> If not, my concern is that 0.22 is regressing further from the popular 
>>>> Apache release and I'm inclined to abandon 0.22. Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Nige
>>>
>
>

Reply via email to