Thanks Sangjin, Li and for sharing your points also. Yes. That's my original point that we shouldn't bind the merge of YARN-2928 to trunk with any alpha release in the short term. Actually, from this ATS v2 merge case, we can see the value of keeping trunk independent of short-term releases as the bar of trunk merging is different from alpha release. Let's discuss 3.0.0-alpha release plan and scope in other threads and focus on merging ATS v2 to trunk here. Again, big +1 to merge ATS v2 to trunk.
2016-06-24 10:37 GMT-07:00 Li Lu <[email protected]>: > > On Jun 24, 2016, at 09:59, Sangjin Lee <[email protected]<mailto: > [email protected]>> wrote: > > Also for my understanding, the implication of merging it to trunk is that > it would be included in 3.0.0-alpha1 (unless 3.0.0-alpha1 gets cut before > the merge), right? > Thanks Sangjin and yes, if the 3.0.0-alpha branch is cut after we merge, > that will be included? That said, maybe we do not want to strongly couple > the merge plan with release plans now since YARN-2928 not yet merged in > trunk? >
