Konstantin and Milind, As I've noted on the other thread (my bad):
> However, the problem is that hadoop-0.22 has removed public and > non-deprecated apis/features (i.e. security) which are present in branch-1 > (previously branch-0.20.2xx). > > This is against the Apache Hadoop release policy on major releases i.e. only > features deprecated for at least one release can be removed. This is a long standing issue with branch-0.22 - are either of you planning on fixing this? If so, could you please share some roadmap/timelines? thanks, Arun On Mar 19, 2012, at 12:34 PM, <[email protected]> <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree with Konstantin. In previous discussion, I had suggested > simultaneous renumbering, but for some reason it was not considered. > > (For history buffs: I upgraded from Windows 1.0 to Windows 3.1 straight. > Windows 2.0 did not have many features that made it compelling to upgrade. > It did not seem odd to skip a number then, and I don't see why it would > now. I also skipped Windows Vista and upgraded from XP to Windows 7, even > if Vista was touted as a major release.) > > - Milind > > --- > Milind Bhandarkar > Chief Architect, Greenplum Labs, Data Computing Division, EMC > +1-650-523-3858 (W) > +1-408-666-8483 (M) > > > > On 3/19/12 12:04 PM, "Konstantin Shvachko" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hadoop naming is definitely confusing. And having Hadoop-1 did not >> make it less confusing for users. >> >>> Current 0.22 -> Gets renamed to 1.5 (if it ever gets tested and >>> released) >> >> It was released on November 29, 2011. >> eBay is actively using it as of today. >> >> If the goal of renaming branches is to make things less confusing >> about Hadoop, then I agree with people saying we should do a >> simultaneous rename of the branches. That is >> Current 0.22 -> 2 >> Current 0.23 -> 3 >> >> It almost sounds like release .22 does not deserve a whole number, >> only a fraction. But having .22 renamed to 1.5 creates a confusion >> that it belongs to Hadoop-1 line, which is not exactly the message we >> want to send out. >> Also I don't know what the number of commits reflects, and whether it >> is good or not to have many for a particular release. >> >> If the community decides to rename .22 to 2 I will be glad to work on it. >> >> Thanks, >> --Konstantin >> >> On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Todd Papaioannou >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Mar 18, 2012, at 10:01 AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: >>> >>>> 9.22 can't be considered as 1.5 because it is the major release from >>>> 1.0 (old >>>> 0.20.x). Besides, by declaring it as 1.5 we'll be planting future >>>> confusion of >>>> the same sort that happened around 0.20* line. >>>> >>>> And last but not least, the same discussion has happened in the past >>>> around >>>> 1.0 release time like http://is.gd/x1fVqu >>> >>> Yes I remember it well, but AFAIC there was no clear decision on 0.22 >>> or 0.23. There were competing proposals and opinions and basically what >>> happened was that we punted the decision on anything other than >>> 0.20->1.0 until a later date. But, that later date is now approaching >>> and we continue to call the current release in question 0.23. Hence my >>> original email. >>> >>> Personally, I do not believe 0.22 is sufficiently major to call it 2.0 >>> and push 0.23 to 3.0. But that's just my $0.02. I don't feel strongly >>> enough to worry about what the outcome is. >>> >>> What I _do_ care strongly about is that we get some resolution and stop >>> using 0.23 as a release name. It's confusing to the market and the >>> customer base, and while we have made great progress in simplifying >>> things with the 1.0 release moniker, we need to continue to make >>> progress. >>> >>> ToddP >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Cos >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 10:41PM, Todd Papaioannou wrote: >>>>> All, >>>>> >>>>> With the upcoming release of 0.23, isn't it about time that we >>>>> started calling 0.23 "Hadoop 2.0" instead? >>>>> >>>>> While the numbering system may make sense to everyone here, to the >>>>> rest of the world it's going to be hella confusing for 0.23 to come >>>>> out after Hadoop 1.0 was released. Since 0.23 has MR2 in it I think >>>>> that it would make sense to call it 2.0. Also, I think would really >>>>> help with the brand awareness/perception of the project in the wider >>>>> customer audience. >>>>> >>>>> I know there are some other potential releases out there too, so my >>>>> overall suggestion would be: >>>>> >>>>> Current 1.X -> Remains 1.x (as new bug fix releases are released) >>>>> Current 0.22 -> Gets renamed to 1.5 (if it ever gets tested and >>>>> released) >>>>> Current 0.23 -> Gets renamed to 2.0 >>>>> >>>>> Remember, a large part of the reason for renaming 0.20.xx to 1.0 was >>>>> to make project progress more understandable to the rest of the world. >>>>> We should ensure we don't regress with the next major release. >>>>> >>>>> Thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> ToddP >>>>> >>> >> > -- Arun C. Murthy Hortonworks Inc. http://hortonworks.com/
