I am fine with 23.1 and 23.2 going away, so long as 23.1 has a tag. --Bobby
On 8/28/12 1:36 PM, "Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli" <vino...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > >Thanks Bobby, makes sense to keep 0.23.3 as is for now. > >What about my comments about 23.1 and 23.2? > >Thanks, >+Vinod > >On Aug 28, 2012, at 6:47 AM, Robert Evans wrote: > >> I plan to do a RC of 0.23.3 in the next few days. I am waiting for some >> tests of what is on branch-0.23 right now to pass before I create the >> branch. MAPREDUCE-3943 went in recently and it is big enough I want >>some >> more tests before I feel comfortable with it. The tests for it so far >> look good so I expect to get started on it today or tomorrow, but I have >> never done a release before so I am sure it will take me a few days to >>get >> everything right. Also I don't see any reason to branch early when all >> that is going in is bug fixes. >> >> --Bobby Evans >> >> >> On 8/27/12 8:55 PM, "Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli" <vino...@hortonworks.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Seems to me that stale branches have started accumulating. Here's what >>>I >>> am thinking. >>> >>> 2.* line >>> - 2.0.1-alpha is released, so branch-2.0.1-alpha should instead be >>> called branch-2.0.2-alpha? >>> >>> 0.23.* line >>> - 0.23.1 was released long time back, so knock off branch-0.23.1 >>> altogether? >>> - 0.23.2 seems to be dead, so knock off branch-0.23.2 too? >>> - 0.23.3 is the next expected release, so I suppose all the commits are >>> going into branch-0.23. Either we can >>> -- create branch-0.23.3 out of branch-0.23 now itself or >>> -- commit as is to branch-0.23 and create RC out of the same whenever >>> that happens. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> +Vinod >>> PS: I missed action for ~1 month, please correct me if I am wrong. >> >
