[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-1161?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12484779
]
Tahir Hashmi commented on HADOOP-1161:
--------------------------------------
> * Use trunk for main development.
> * Create a branch for each major release.
> * Apply changes to trunk first, then backport into branches later.
+1
I've worked with a project following these conventions and it worked out well
for us. The way we handled back-porting was as follows:
1. decide whether the issue needs back-porting and how far it goes
2. the owner of the issue creates separate patches for trunk and maintenance
branches
3. both patches are peer reviewed
Deciding what to back-port was based on issue severity and we only back-ported
critical stuff for which there were no work-arounds. We rarely ever back-ported
to releases before the one currently under maintenance.
Step 2 appears to be burdensome on contributors but in practice isn't so great
an issue. It also works well in cases where the contributors out-number
commiters since contributors have the best knowledge of how to resolve
conflicts for their patch.
> need improved release process
> -----------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-1161
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-1161
> Project: Hadoop
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: build
> Reporter: Doug Cutting
> Fix For: 0.13.0
>
>
> Hadoop's release process needs improvement. We should better ensure that
> releases are stable, not releasing versions that have not been proven stable
> on large clusters, and we should better observe Apache's release procedures.
> Once agreed on, this process should be documented in
> http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-hadoop/HowToRelease.
> Here's a proposal:
> . candidate release builds should be placed in
> lucene.apache.org/hadoop/dev/dist
> . candidate artifacts should be accompanied by a md5 and pgp signatures
> . a 72-hour vote for the release artifact should be called on hadoop-dev.
> . 3 binding +1 votes and a majority are required
> . if the vote passes, the release can then posted to
> www.apache.org/dist/lucene/hadoop for mirroring
> This would bring us into accord with Apache's requirements, and better permit
> large-cluster validation.
> We should also build consensus for a release before we commence this process.
> Perhaps we should aim for releases every two months instead of every month.
> We should perhaps develop more elaborate branching and merging conventions
> around releases. Currently we mostly lock-out changes intended for release
> X+1 from trunk until release X is complete, which can be awkward. How can we
> better manage that?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
