+1 from me as well. Though it will be a bit of a pain for ops upgrading, I think the pain of maintaining two versions is worse.
-Todd On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 6:20 AM, Vinod KV <vino...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote: > > +1 from my side too. Looks like there is overwhelming majority from the dev > side. > > May be we should call for an explicit vote. Making it a vote calls for > attention from anyone who might've missed this. This thread seems more of a > proposal. > > Thanks, > +Vinod > > > > > On Wednesday 13 July 2011 01:02 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > >> On Jul 13, 2011, at 12:30 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: >> >> On Jul 7, 2011, at 9:58 AM, Eli Collins wrote: >>> >>> I think #2 makes the most sense. From a developer perspective, MR2 is >>>> good stuff, there's no need for us to maintain two implementations in >>>> trunk/23 since we're already maintaining MR1 in the current releases. >>>> >>> +1 >>> >>> Anyone feel otherwise? >>> >>> If we reach consensus, I can do this as part of merging MR-279 into >> trunk - which (see the email I sent out on merging) is a couple of weeks >> away. >> >> thanks, >> Arun >> > > -- Todd Lipcon Software Engineer, Cloudera
