If we are talkng about official hive releases, then I think it has to be +1 by the Hadoop PMC.
-dhruba On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Joydeep Sen Sarma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > +1 to that. Based on all the discussions around hadoop-1700 - it seems > hbase was fairly dependent on core hdfs functionality - so that may have led > to the release strategy. > > For the release strategy - I guess the standard route is to decide content > for 0.1 (say), then cut it and then keep it open only for bug fixes. Perhaps > we should take a look at the current bugs and demarcate the feature requests > and then choose a subset of them that takes hive to 0.1? of the major > features that keep popping up - the order-by has got to be the biggest one I > imagine. > > If we can start by having a first release number for hive - we start > targeting the bugs appropriately. Thoughts? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ashish Thusoo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 2:50 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Cutting releases from hive > > We did see that HBase has closely mirrored its release with hadoop, but > that approach ties our releases closely with hadoop releases. An immediate > fallout of that is that if today we want to create versions for 0.17, 0.18, > 0.19 and trunk, we would be creating 3 more branches and many of the bug > fixes that are currently happening would have to be ported to 3 more > branches. That would just create a lot of development overhead. So we were > thinking of following a model where the releases are indepenedent of hadoop > but are certified to compile with some set of versions in hadoop. > > Ashish > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Hammerbacher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 11:51 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Cutting releases from hive > > Hey, > Here's another thought: the HBase team initially used their own version > numbers, but eventually started naming versions of HBase after Hadoop > versions. It might be worth understanding why they did so, and perhaps > adopting the same policy for Hive. Notably, Zookeeper and Pig do not follow > this convention. > > Later, > Jeff > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Ashish Thusoo <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > We would want to start cutting releases for hive some time as we are > > no longer tied to the hadoop releases anymore. I wanted to start some > > discussion on this to determine what would be good release criteria. > > Basically: > > > > 1. What current box we must have fixed before we cut a release 2. What > > current features should go into the release > > > > And any other thoughts you may have... > > > > Ashish >
