Thanks all, +1 from me too.
There's three binding +1, two non-binding +1, and no -1 so I'll merge
YARN-8200 to branch-2 shortly. I'll skip branch-3.0 since it's EOL as
others have mentioned.
Jonathan Hung
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:49 AM Konstantin Shvachko
wrote:
> +1 for the merge.
>
> We
+1 for the merge.
We probably should not bother with branch-3.0 merge since it's been voted
EOL.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 4:43 PM Jonathan Hung wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> As per [1], starting a vote to merge YARN-8200 (and YARN-8200.branch3)
> feature branch to branch-2 (and
+1 (binding)
As Jonathan said this feature in branch-2 has been running stably for over
a year. Therefore I’m supportive to the merge
On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 2:00 PM Jim Brennan
wrote:
> +1 (non-binding).
> I have built branch-2 with the latest YARN-8200 patch
> (YARN-8200-branch-2.003.patch).
+1 (non-binding).
I have built branch-2 with the latest YARN-8200 patch
(YARN-8200-branch-2.003.patch). I ran all of the NM/RM tests and ran a few
test jobs on a one-node cluster with default settings.
On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 3:51 PM Oliver Hu wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> We have used this
Hi folks,
As per [1], starting a vote to merge YARN-8200 (and YARN-8200.branch3)
feature branch to branch-2 (and branch-3.0).
Vote runs for 7 days, to Thursday, Aug 29 5:00PM PDT.
Thanks.
[1]
