Agreed, I was about to point this out. What else is on HDFS of this nature?
Arun On Nov 19, 2012, at 10:09 AM, Siddharth Seth wrote: > YARN-142/MAPREDUCE-4067 should ideally be fixed before we commit to API > backward compatibility. Also, from the recent YARN meetup - there seemed to > be a requirement to change the AM-RM protocol for container requests. In > this case, I believe it's OK to not have all functionality implemented, as > long as the protocol itself can represent the requirements. However, as > Bobby pointed out, given the current adoption by other projects - > incompatible changes at this point can be problematic and needs to be > figured out. > > Thanks > - Sid > > > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Robert Evans <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I am OK with removing the alpha assuming that we think that the APIs are >> stable enough that we are willing to truly start maintaining backwards >> compatibility on them within 2.X. From what I have seen I think that they >> are fairly stable and I think there is enough adoption by other projects >> right now that breaking backwards compatibility would be problematic. >> >> --Bobby Evans >> >> On 11/16/12 11:34 PM, "Stack" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Aaron T. Myers <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Hi Arun, >>>> >>>> Given that the 2.0.3 release is intended to reflect the growing >>>> stability >>>> of YARN, and the QJM work will be included in 2.0.3 which provides a >>>> complete HDFS HA solution, I think it's time we consider removing the >>>> "-alpha" label from the release version. My preference would be to >>>> remove >>>> the label entirely, but we could also perhaps call it "-beta" or >>>> something. >>>> >>>> Thoughts? >>>> >>> >>> I think it fine after two minor releases undoing the '-alpha' suffix. >>> >>> If folks insist we next go to '-beta', I'd hope we'd travel all >>> remaining 22 letters of the greek alphabet before we 2.0.x. >>> >>> St.Ack >> >> -- Arun C. Murthy Hortonworks Inc. http://hortonworks.com/
