Tested the RC on a single node cluster, kicked the tires. Looks good. +1 on its release.
Regardless of how the RC got here, we only get benefit from releasing it. It represents a huge chunk of work from our contributors, provides needed features for our users and moves us one step closer to making regular releases again. -Jakob On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote: > Yup, exactly right - it has been reverted in the trunk as well. Thanks > for digging this up, Koji! > > On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 11:22, Koji Noguchi <knogu...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote: >>>> except >>>> HADOOP-6386 and HADOOP-6428. >>> causes a rolling port side effect in TT >>> >> I remember bugging Cos and Rob to revert HADOOP-6386. >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-6760?focusedCommentId=12867342&; >> page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#commen >> t-12867342 >> >> Koji >> >> On 5/2/11 9:43 PM, "Konstantin Boudnik" <c...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 16:56, Arun C Murthy <a...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On May 2, 2011, at 3:01 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On May 2, 2011, at 12:31 PM, Tom White wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I just did a quick search, and these are the JIRAs that are in 0.20.2 >>>>>> but appear not to be in 0.20.203.0. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks Tom. >>>>> >>>>> I did a quick analysis: >>>>> >>>>> # Remaining for 0.20.203 >>>>> * HADOOP-5611 >>>>> * HADOOP-5612 >>>>> * HADOOP-5623 >>>>> * HDFS-596 >>>>> * HDFS-723 >>>>> * HDFS-732 >>>>> * HDFS-579 >>>>> * MAPREDUCE-1070 >>>>> * HADOOP-6315 >>>>> * MAPREDUCE-1163 >>>>> * HADOOP-5759 >>>>> * HADOOP-6269 >>>>> * HADOOP-6386 >>>>> * HADOOP-6428 >>>>> >>>> >>>> Owen, Suresh and I have committed everything on this list except >>>> HADOOP-6386 and HADOOP-6428. Not sure which of the two are >>>> relevant/necessary, I'll check with Cos. Other than that hadoop-0.20.203 >>>> now a superset of hadoop-0.20.2. >>>> >>> >>> I have looked somewhat more into these two JIRAs and if I remember correctly >>> this fix causes a rolling port side effect in TT and it has been reverted in >>> 0.20.200 (Y! Fred? release) because Ops weren't happy about this (I am sure >>> you can check internal Git to cross-verify my recollection). >>> >>> Considering above, these might be better left outside of the release and, >>> perhaps, they should be reverted in trunk as well. >>> >>> Cos >>> >>> >>>> thanks, >>>> Arun >>>> >> >> >
