Yes. Maybe we can just wait for 23.1. They seem to be nearly complete. And then release a HAMA_YARN-0.1 or something like that.
2012/2/1 Edward J. Yoon <[email protected]> > I just noticed that there's a 'allowTimestampedSnapshots' in > release-plugin. > > But, I prefer delay, it's more stable. > > What do you think about excluding yarn-version from 0.4.0-incubating > release? > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Thomas Jungblut > <[email protected]> wrote: > > You already heard it on commons-dev. There is nothin in the repository. > > However, when slicing the release, you could download the real release > and > > manually put it into the lib folder. > > > > We can also wait with releasing YARN.. We should look at > > HAMA-452<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAMA-452> first, > > afterwards we can release it - in my opinion as ALPHA. > > > > > > 2012/2/1 Edward J. Yoon <[email protected]> > > > >> BTW, should we release yarn with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT? > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Thomas Jungblut > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Maybe we can just version-up simply until we reach version 1.0. > >> >> And, I'd like to focus more on Hadoop 1.0 and release Hama 1.0 on top > >> >> of Hadoop 1.0. > >> >> AFAIK, 0.21 and 0.22 releases are unpopular. We may want to release > >> >> just Hama 2.0 for Hadoop 2.0. > >> > > >> > > >> > Yes, this sounds reasonable. > >> > > >> > 2012/1/31 Chia-Hung Lin <[email protected]> > >> > > >> >> +1 > >> >> > >> >> And as Thomas mentioned that sticking to the stable release looks > >> >> safer for us in maintenance. > >> >> > >> >> On 31 January 2012 11:13, Edward J. Yoon <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> > Maybe we can just version-up simply until we reach version 1.0. > >> >> > > >> >> > And, I'd like to focus more on Hadoop 1.0 and release Hama 1.0 on > top > >> >> > of Hadoop 1.0. > >> >> > > >> >> > AFAIK, 0.21 and 0.22 releases are unpopular. We may want to release > >> >> > just Hama 2.0 for Hadoop 2.0. > >> >> > > >> >> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Thomas Jungblut > >> >> > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> Yes. But I very much doubt that it works without any changes. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> There is > >> >> >> - 20.2 (legacy stable) which we fully support with Hama 0.4.0. > >> >> >> - 0.20.203, 0.20.204, 0.20.205 which should work with Hama 0.4.0 > as > >> >> well. > >> >> >> But we have to test this. > >> >> >> - 21.0 I don't believe that anyone runs on this. However Hama may > not > >> >> run > >> >> >> on this as well. > >> >> >> - 22.0 and 1.0, I think both of them won't work. > >> >> >> - 23.0 we have YARN. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> We'll see. From a critical point of view, we have two subreleases. > >> >> Better > >> >> >> would if we can somehow make Hama 0.4.1 work on 21 and 22. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> In my opinion we should always stick with the latest stable > release, > >> >> which > >> >> >> is *0.20.203. * > >> >> >> And the question is how they think they proceed with the > releases. On > >> >> the > >> >> >> common roadmap I see 1.1.0 and 0.22.1, as well as 24.0. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> 2012/1/26 Chia-Hung Lin <[email protected]> > >> >> >> > >> >> >>> If there is not difference between 0.4.0 and 0.4.1, perhaps > >> >> >>> maintaining 1 version (e.g. 0.4.0 + hadoop 1.0 or 0.4.0 + 0.20.2) > >> >> >>> would be a bit easier for us. > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> On 25 January 2012 17:15, Thomas Jungblut > >> >> >>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >>> > What if we ship different Hama versions with different Hadoop > >> >> versions? > >> >> >>> > let's say 0.4.0 ships with 20.2, 0.4.1 with Hadoop 1.0. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > What should we do with yarn? > >> >> >>> > I believe that we should just pack the jar, so people can try > it > >> out. > >> >> >>> > We also should flag this as ALPHA, I don't believe my work is > >> stable. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > 2012/1/25 Tommaso Teofili <[email protected]>: > >> >> >>> >> +1 > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >>> >> 2012/1/25 Edward J. Yoon <[email protected]> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >>> >>> Let's release 0.4 incubating with hadoop 0.20.2 and switch > the > >> >> trunk > >> >> >>> >>> to Hadoop 1.0 based. > >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Edward J. Yoon < > >> >> [email protected]> > >> >> >>> >>> wrote: > >> >> >>> >>> > Hi all, > >> >> >>> >>> > > >> >> >>> >>> > When we release 0.4-incubating, should we use hadoop 1.0.0? > >> and > >> >> >>> should > >> >> >>> >>> > yarn module be included with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT? > >> >> >>> >>> > > >> >> >>> >>> > -- > >> >> >>> >>> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon > >> >> >>> >>> > @eddieyoon > >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >>> >>> -- > >> >> >>> >>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon > >> >> >>> >>> @eddieyoon > >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > -- > >> >> >>> > Thomas Jungblut > >> >> >>> > Berlin > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> -- > >> >> >> Thomas Jungblut > >> >> >> Berlin <[email protected]> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > -- > >> >> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon > >> >> > @eddieyoon > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Thomas Jungblut > >> > Berlin <[email protected]> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon > >> @eddieyoon > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Thomas Jungblut > > Berlin <[email protected]> > > > > -- > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon > @eddieyoon > -- Thomas Jungblut Berlin <[email protected]>
