If there are not a lot of changes just to make Java 7 a requirement (I
understand it's basically pom changes and unit test failure and findbugs
fallouts), how about merging that with the next release and declare the
next release and on Java-7-only?
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Steve Loughran
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Karthik Kambatla ka...@cloudera.com wrote:
It would be nice to cut the branch for the next feature release (not just
Java 7) in the first week of January, so we can get the RC out by the end
of the month?
Yesterday, this came up in an offline discussion on
It would be nice to cut the branch for the next feature release (not just
Java 7) in the first week of January, so we can get the RC out by the end
of the month?
Yesterday, this came up in an offline discussion on ATS. Given people can
run 2.6 on Java 7, is there merit to doing 2.7 with the exact
Late January sounds fine to me. I think we should be able to wrap it up
much earlier than that (hopefully).
Thanks,
Sangjin
On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
Sangjin/Karthik,
How about planning on hadoop-2.8 by late Jan? Thoughts?
thanks,
Arun
On
If 2.7 is being positioned as the JDK7-only release, then it would be good
to know how 2.8 lines up in terms of timing. Our interest is landing the
shared cache feature (YARN-1492)... Thanks.
Sangjin
On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Karthik Kambatla ka...@cloudera.com wrote:
Thanks for starting
Sangjin/Karthik,
How about planning on hadoop-2.8 by late Jan? Thoughts?
thanks,
Arun
On Dec 2, 2014, at 11:09 AM, Sangjin Lee sjl...@gmail.com wrote:
If 2.7 is being positioned as the JDK7-only release, then it would be good
to know how 2.8 lines up in terms of timing. Our interest is
Folks,
With hadoop-2.6 out it's time to think ahead.
As we've discussed in the past, 2.6 was the last release which supports JDK6.
I'm thinking it's best to try get 2.7 out in a few weeks (maybe by the
holidays) with just the switch to JDK7 (HADOOP-10530) and possibly
support for JDK-1.8 (as a
Thanks for starting this thread, Arun.
Your proposal seems reasonable to me. I suppose we would like new features
and improvements to go into 2.8 then? If yes, what time frame are we
looking at for 2.8? Looking at YARN, it would be nice to get a release with
shared-cache and a stable version of
