I have not a clue how I got on this thread...It is all very interesting, but please take me off.
Heather Bales ☺ CRM Manager - Digital Marketing NCSOFT (W)206-588-7268 (C)206-790-2665 [email protected] | http://us.ncsoft.com 1501 Fourth Ave. 20th Floor Seattle, WA 98101 -----Original Message----- From: Aaron T. Myers [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 9:07 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Heads Up - hadoop-2.0.3 release Great, that makes sense to me as well. Thanks a lot, and have a happy holidays. Aaron On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Arun C Murthy <[email protected]> wrote: > As Sid responded I think we can move off alpha once we fix > YARN-142/MAPREDUCE-4067. There are other apis we should clean up, but > none as egregious as those two. > > Someone on my team is starting on it as we speak and I believe we can > get it done sometime in Jan... thus targetting 2.0.4 (as a beta?). By > then we'll also have wider rollouts of YARN and would have fixed some > more issues we've seen at very high scale deployments at Y!. Sounds > like the right time to do a beta release to me. > > Arun > > On Dec 19, 2012, at 10:13 AM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: > > > Hey Arun, > > > > Awesome to see we're almost down to zero blockers. What are your > > thoughts on removing the "alpha" label from the upcoming release? It > > seems to me from the earlier discussion that most folks feel that > > we're at the point where the interfaces are sufficiently stable to warrant > > it. > > > > Aaron > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Arun C Murthy <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Nearly there: > >> http://s.apache.org/hadoop-2-blockers > >> > >> YARN-217 should be easy, I'd also like to get in YARN-253. > >> > >> Arun > >> > >> On Dec 19, 2012, at 1:15 AM, Todd Lipcon wrote: > >> > >>> Any news on how this is progressing? Some folks in this thread > >>> below inquired about getting this release out around the New Year > >>> timeframe, but it looks like YARN-117 subtasks have gone pretty > >>> quiet. We all know how long lifecycle changes can take to get > >>> pushed through ;-) > >>> > >>> -Todd > >>> > >>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Steve Loughran > >>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> I want to make some changes to the lifecycle of a yarn service > >>>> (in a backwards compatible way). > >>>> > >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-117 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> 1. formal state machine model with stop state idempotent and > >> entry-able > >>>> from any state > >>>> 2. waiting/blocked state a service can enter when waiting for > >> something > >>>> else > >>>> 3. an alternate base class that does the state model checks > >>>> before executing any state change functions -currently its done > >>>> at end-of-operation in the super() calls. > >>>> 4. gradual move of services to the stricter base class. > >>>> > >>>> With a new base class nothing will break (as the move can be done > >>>> case-by-case, leaving the heavily subclassed ones alone); the > >>>> state > >> model > >>>> extensions & formalisation would be visible but not used. > >>>> > >>>> I don't want to hold anything up, because I need more testing of > things > >>>> before this is ready for review. I just want to get the fixes in > before > >> it > >>>> ships > >>>> > >>>> On 19 November 2012 16:22, 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 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Todd Lipcon > >>> Software Engineer, Cloudera > >> > >> -- > >> Arun C. Murthy > >> Hortonworks Inc. > >> http://hortonworks.com/ > >> > >> > >> > > -- > Arun C. Murthy > Hortonworks Inc. > http://hortonworks.com/ > > >
