+1 (non binding) Ran system tests on both secure and non secure hadoop (20 node clusters) and tests passed with expected results.
-- Arpit ar...@hortonworks.com On Dec 18, 2011, at 11:18 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > Okay guys, obviously I can't add. Something about a carry bit... :-) > Let's try: > The vote will close at 12:30pm PST on Friday 23 Dec. > > Thank you. > Regards, > --Matt > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Tim Broberg <tim.brob...@exar.com> wrote: > >> Hmm, on what year does the 13th next fall on a Friday? >> >> - Tim. >> >> On Dec 16, 2011, at 6:14 PM, "Konstantin Boudnik" <c...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:10PM, Matt Foley wrote: >>>> Hello all, >>>> I have posted a new release candidate for Hadoop 1.0.0 at >>>> http://people.apache.org/~mattf/hadoop-1.0.0-rc3/ >>>> >>>> Please download, evaluate, and vote on this list. >>>> The artifacts have also been posted to the maven repo. >>>> The vote will close at 12:30pm PST on Friday 13 Dec. >>> >>> So, the vote has been closed for three days? Ok then ;) >>> >>>> There had been an issue raised regarding >>>> HADOOP-7929<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-7929>. >>>> This has been evaluated and the jira closed as invalid. Thanks to >> Andrew >>>> and others involved for helping assure the quality of this release. >>>> >>>> As previously mentioned, use of JDK 1.6.0_26 or better is recommended >> for >>>> this release. >>>> >>>> Thank you, >>>> >>>>> --Matt (Release Manager for 1.0.0, formerly known as 0.20.205.1) >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:32 AM, Matt Foley <mfo...@hortonworks.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> I have a clean build of the below, that passes junit testing, and was >>>>> about to post it, when I got email about the newly opened HADOOP-7929< >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-7929> "Port >>>>> HADOOP-7070 to branch-1". It appears this prevents secure HBase from >>>>> working with secure Hadoop. Since HBase support is a key element of >> 1.0.0, >>>>> and it seems this will be fixable fairly promptly, I am going to wait >>>>> another day for 1.0.0-rc3. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for your patience, >>>>> --Matt >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Matt Foley <mfo...@hortonworks.com >>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In various emails and jiras, I have been asked to incorporate the >>>>>> following additional patches in 1.0.0: >>>>>> >>>>>> - MAPREDUCE-3319 (Roman) >>>>>> - HADOOP-7903 (Arpit) >>>>>> - MAPREDUCE-3475 (Daryn) >>>>>> - HDFS-2589 (Daryn) >>>>>> - HADOOP jira about to be opened (Chris W.) for missing jackson >>>>>> dependency in hadoop pom. >>>>>> >>>>>> I have not heard of any other significant issues in this build. >>>>>> I will re-spin the release candidate tomorrow. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> --Matt >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Matt Foley <ma...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello all, >>>>>>> I have posted a release candidate for Hadoop 1.0.0 at >>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~mattf/hadoop-1.0.0-rc2/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please download, evaluate, and vote on this list. >>>>>>> The artifacts will be posted to the maven repo shortly. >>>>>>> The vote will close at noon PST on Thursday 15 Dec. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It may be of interest that it is important to use an appropriate >> version >>>>>>> of Java. >>>>>>> I lost several days due to instabilities apparently in Oracle JDK >>>>>>> 1.6.0_23, which >>>>>>> caused about 30 junit test failures in contrib (streaming, >> schedulers, >>>>>>> and gridmix). >>>>>>> Switching to JDK 1.6.0_26 made the problems go away. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The release artifacts in this hadoop-1.0.0-rc2 were build with >>>>>>> JDK 1.6.0_26. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>> --Matt (Release Manager for 1.0.0, formerly known as 0.20.205.1) >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> >> The information and any attached documents contained in this message >> may be confidential and/or legally privileged. The message is >> intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended >> recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, or >> reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are >> not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately by >> return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. >>
