If I have to get to the other end of 14 busses I can either do it Evel Knievel style and jump them all at once or I can walk from one end to the other, one step at a time. I personally would rather take many different small steps than try to take one giant flying leap and risk missing.
Also I don't think anyone said that we are going to to a major release per feature. I thought the proposal was to do a 2.0 release before snapshots is merged in and a have snapshots go into 2.1. I don't really want to open up the version numbering discussion again but I want my quote to be interpreted the way I intended it to be. I don't see snapshots as a major change. I see it as a step. I just don't see a reason to keep two parallel lines branch-2 where we try hard to maintain compatibility, and trunk where is is a dumping ground that only makes it more difficult to move to in the future. --Bobby On 5/10/13 1:55 PM, "Arun C Murthy" <[email protected]> wrote: > >On May 9, 2013, at 10:03 PM, Uma Maheswara Rao G wrote: > >> Adding new features really a great thing and surely each big feature >>can be included in one one major release as well. > > >Surely the one thing we have learnt over the last 4-5 years in this >project is that we cannot make too many major releases. Notice how long >hadoop-0.20/hadoop-1 lives; the same will happen with hadoop-2.x. Look at >Bobby's message on this thread on *-dev lists: > >>>> Up to this point we have almost successfully done this switch once, >>>>from 1.0 to 2.0. I have a hard time believing that we are going to do >>>>this again for another 5 years. > >Each major release is a *lot* of work and is, subsequently, an >opportunity where incompatibilities at various levels creep in - our >users are not well served by this. > >So, it's a fallacy that we can and should make major releases per >feature. > >Arun >
