Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

Hi Andrew, We have completed the merge of TSv2 to trunk. You can now go ahead with the branching. Regards, Varun Saxena. On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 11:35 PM, Andrew Wang wrote: > Sure. Ping me when the TSv2 goes in, and I can take care of branching. > > We're still

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

Hi Subru, Basically we're amending the proposal from the original email in the chain to also immediately create the branch-3.0.0-beta1 release branch. As described in my 2017-08-25 wiki update, we're gating the merge of these two features to branch-3.0 on additional testing, but this keeps 3.0.0

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

Andrew, First up thanks for tirelessly pushing on 3.0 release. I am confused about your comment on creating 2 branches as my understanding of Jason's (and Vinod's) comments are that we defer creating branch-3? IMHO, we should consider creating branch-3 (necessary but not sufficient) only when

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

Gotcha, make sense, so I will hold commit until you cut the two branches and TSv2 get committed. Thanks, Wangda On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Andrew Wang wrote: > Hi Wangda, > > I'll cut two branches: branch-3.0 (3.0.0-SNAPSHOT) and branch-3.0.0-beta1 >

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

Hi Wangda, I'll cut two branches: branch-3.0 (3.0.0-SNAPSHOT) and branch-3.0.0-beta1 (3.0.0-beta1-SNAPSHOT). This way we can merge GA features to branch-3.0 but not branch-3.0.0-beta1. Best, Andrew On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Wangda Tan wrote: > Vrushali, > > Sure

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

Vrushali, Sure we can wait TSv2 merged before merge resource profile branch. Andrew, My understanding is you're going to cut branch-3.0 for 3.0-beta1, and the same branch (branch-3.0) will be used for 3.0-GA as well. So my question is, there're several features (TSv2, resource profile,

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

Sure. Ping me when the TSv2 goes in, and I can take care of branching. We're still waiting on the native services and S3Guard merges, but I don't want to hold branching to the last minute. On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Vrushali C wrote: > Hi Andrew, > As Rohith

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

Hi Andrew, As Rohith mentioned, if you are good with it, from the TSv2 side, we are ready to go for merge tonight itself (Pacific time) right after the voting period ends. Varun Saxena has been diligently rebasing up until now so most likely our merge should be reasonably straightforward.

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

On 29 August 2017 at 06:24, Andrew Wang wrote: > So far I've seen no -1's to the branching proposal, so I plan to execute > this tomorrow unless there's further feedback. > For on going branch merge threads i.e TSv2, voting will be closing tomorrow. Does it end up in

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

So far I've seen no -1's to the branching proposal, so I plan to execute this tomorrow unless there's further feedback. Regarding the above discussion, I think Jason and I have essentially the same opinion. I hope that keeping trunk a release branch means a higher bar for merges and code review

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017, at 14:22, Allen Wittenauer wrote: > > > On Aug 28, 2017, at 12:41 PM, Jason Lowe wrote: > > > > I think this gets back to the "if it's worth committing" part. > > This brings us back to my original question: > > "Doesn't this place an undue

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

Allen Wittenauer wrote: > > On Aug 25, 2017, at 1:23 PM, Jason Lowe wrote: > > > > Allen Wittenauer wrote: > > > > > Doesn't this place an undue burden on the contributor with the first > incompatible patch to prove worthiness? What happens if it is decided that > it's not good

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

> On Aug 25, 2017, at 1:23 PM, Jason Lowe wrote: > > Allen Wittenauer wrote: > > > Doesn't this place an undue burden on the contributor with the first > > incompatible patch to prove worthiness? What happens if it is decided that > > it's not good enough? > > It is a

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

Allen Wittenauer wrote: > Doesn't this place an undue burden on the contributor with the first > incompatible patch to prove worthiness? What happens if it is decided that > it's not good enough? It is a burden for that first, "this can't go anywhere else but 4.x" change, but arguably that

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

Hi Andrew, Thanks for updating the proposal, +1. - Wangda On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Allen Wittenauer wrote: > > > On Aug 25, 2017, at 10:36 AM, Andrew Wang > wrote: > > > Until we need to make incompatible changes, there's no

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

> On Aug 25, 2017, at 10:36 AM, Andrew Wang wrote: > Until we need to make incompatible changes, there's no need for > a Hadoop 4.0 version. Some questions: Doesn't this place an undue burden on the contributor with the first incompatible patch to prove

Re: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

e.org" <hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org>; "yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org" <yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org> Sent: Friday, August 25, 2017 12:36 PM Subject: [DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3 Hi folks, With 3.0.0-beta1 fast approaching, I wanted to go over the propose

[DISCUSS] Branches and versions for Hadoop 3

Hi folks, With 3.0.0-beta1 fast approaching, I wanted to go over the proposed branching strategy. In the early 2.x days, moving trunk immediately to 3.0.0 was a mistake. branch-2 and trunk were virtually identical, and increased backport complexity. Until we need to make incompatible changes,