Looks like we are all clear now, I'll create an RC presently.
Thanks everyone.
Arun
On Oct 1, 2013, at 8:59 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
Yes, sorry if it wasn't clear.
As others seem to agree, I think we'll be better getting a protocol/api
stable GA done and then
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
Yes, sorry if it wasn't clear.
As others seem to agree, I think we'll be better getting a protocol/api
stable GA done and then iterating on bugs etc.
I'm not super worried about HADOOP-9984 since symlinks just made it
If we're serious about not breaking compatibility after GA, then we need to
slow down and make sure we get these new APIs right, or can add them in a
compatible fashion.
HADOOP-9984 ended up being a bigger change than initially expected, and we
need to break compatibility with out-of-tree
I don't think HADOOP-9972 is a must-do for the next Apache release,
whatever version number it ends up having. It's just adding a new
API, not changing any existing ones, and it can be done entirely in
generic code. (The globber doesn't involve FileSystem or AFS
subclasses).
My understanding is
Guys,
I took a look at the content in 2.1.2-beta so far, other than the critical
fixes such as HADOOP-9984 (symlinks) and few others in YARN/MR, there is fairly
little content (unit tests fixes etc.)
Furthermore, it's standing up well in testing too. Plus, the protocols look
good for now (I
Arun,
Does this mean that you want to skip a beta release and go straight to GA
with the next release?
thx
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
Guys,
I took a look at the content in 2.1.2-beta so far, other than the
critical fixes such as HADOOP-9984
(This time copying all the lists)
I am +1 for naming the new branch 2.2.0.
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
Guys,
I took a look at the content in 2.1.2-beta so far, other than the
critical fixes such as HADOOP-9984 (symlinks) and few others in
+1. We should get an RC as soon as possible so that we can get all the
downstream components to sign off. The earlier the better.
Thanks,
+Vinod
On Oct 1, 2013, at 4:15 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
Guys,
I took a look at the content in 2.1.2-beta so far, other than the critical
fixes such as
+1 for naming the new branch 2.2.0
sanjay
On Oct 1, 2013, at 4:55 PM, Suresh Srinivas wrote:
(This time copying all the lists)
I am +1 for naming the new branch 2.2.0.
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
Guys,
I took a look at the content in
: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.1.1-beta)
Guys,
I took a look at the content in 2.1.2-beta so far, other than the critical
fixes such as HADOOP-9984 (symlinks) and few others in YARN/MR, there is fairly
little content (unit tests fixes etc.)
Furthermore, it's standing up well in testing too
Message-
From: Arun C Murthy [mailto:a...@hortonworks.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 4:15 PM
To: common-dev@hadoop.apache.org; hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org;
yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org; mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: 2.1.2 (Was: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.1.1-beta)
Guys
Yes, sorry if it wasn't clear.
As others seem to agree, I think we'll be better getting a protocol/api stable
GA done and then iterating on bugs etc.
I'm not super worried about HADOOP-9984 since symlinks just made it to
branch-2.1 recently.
Currently we only have 2 blockers: HADOOP-9984
12 matches
Mail list logo
