I had one clarifying question for Brock and Xuefu. Was your proposal to
still call the branch from trunk you are planning in a few days 0.15
(and hence release it as 0.15) and have 1.0 be a later release? Or did
you want to call what is now 0.15 1.0? If you wanted 1.0 to be post
0.15, are you ok with stipulating that the next release from trunk after
0.15 (what would have been 0.16) is 1.0?
Alan.
Thejas Nair <mailto:the...@hortonworks.com>
January 22, 2015 at 12:04
Brock, Xuefu,
We seem to have trouble reaching to a consensus here. (Please see my
arguments why I don't see this causing confusions, and let me know if
it changes your opinion).
How should we move forward ? Do you think we need to go through a
formal vote regarding the release plan as per hive by-laws ?
Thejas Nair <mailto:the...@hortonworks.com>
January 22, 2015 at 10:38
I don't see any reasons for confusion.
From a user perspective, 1.0 is going to have a super set of changes
of 0.14.
1.1 (based on planned 0.15 release) will have a super set of changes
in 1.0 .
Xuefu Zhang <mailto:xzh...@cloudera.com>
January 21, 2015 at 22:47
I strongly believe that the concept of 1.0 out of a branch as proposed is
creating the greatest confusion in the community. If for any reason that
1.0 cannot be cut from the trunk, that means that we are not ready and so
shall wait until so before considering such a release. Thus, I'd -1 on
this
proposal.
Thanks,
Xuefu
Gopal V <mailto:gop...@apache.org>
January 21, 2015 at 22:29
On 1/21/15, 7:09 PM, Brock Noland wrote:
Too be clear I strongly feel creating 1.0 from 0.14 will be
confusing. In
fact it's already crrated confusion amongst folks on this list.
Furthermore
1.0 should be created from trunk and be a superset of previous releases.
I don't think there is any confusion over that - 1.0 is a long-term
maintenance which is going to be a super-set of all *critical fixes*
made from here on (emphasis).
In fact, a long-term support release should be released off an
actively updated maintenance branch, which has been baked-in and never
from the trunk.
Those who have followed the earlier mails would realize that the most
important "feature" about this branch is to stick to only long term
maintenance - which in effect is adopting HBase's successful idea.
That is just plain solid engineering.
Anyway, it would be in the best interests of the larger community, to
find out who else finds that approach confusing.
Brock, I'm not sure whether you are confused or whether you think
other people will be confused (and if so, why?).
Cheers,
Gopal
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Vikram Dixit K <vikram.di...@gmail.com>
wrote:
@Brock,
I created this branch from 0.14. I created this branch based on the
email
thread discussing 1.0,
http://search-hadoop.com/m/8er9YGX8g2
where you had said you agreed with the suggestion from Enis from
HBase who
said that we should base 1.0 on a stable version rather than making
it a
feature release.
@Lefty,
You are right in that branch 0.14 has been made 1.0. You are also right
that 0.15 would be 1.1.0 and we should capture that.
Regards
Vikram.
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Thejas Nair <the...@hortonworks.com>
wrote:
Hi Lefty,
Yes, you are right. Anything that is not fixed in 0.14 and is fixed in
1.0 would have 1.0 as the fixed version.
Yes, 0.15.0 would then become 1.1.0 .
Yes, it is a good idea to document this translation somewhere.
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Lefty Leverenz
<leftylever...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> So my initial impression was correct -- instead of calling it
release
> 0.14.1, we're calling it 1.0.0. Or am I hopelessly confused?
>
> Will 0.15.0 be 1.1.0? (If so, I'll need to edit a dozen wikidocs.)
>
> Will release numbers get changed in JIRA issues? Presumably
that's not
> possible in old comments, so we should document the equivalences
> somewhere. A JIRA issue for that with a well-phrased summary
could help
> future searchers.
>
>
> -- Lefty
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 2:47 PM, Eugene Koifman <
ekoif...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
>
>> could we include HIVE-9390 & HIVE-9404? This has been committed to
trunk.
>> They add useful retry logic to support insert/update/delete
functionality.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 1:06 PM, Vikram Dixit K <
vikram.di...@gmail.com
>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Folks,
>> >
>> > I have created branch 1.0 as discussed earlier. All the jiras
that
have
>> > 0.14 as the fix version should be committed to 1.0 branch
instead.
The
>> list
>> > of jiras that are being tracked for 1.0 are as follows:
>> >
>> > HIVE-8485
>> > HIVE-9053
>> > HIVE-8996.
>> >
>> > Please let me know if you want to include more jiras here. I am
working
>> on
>> > generating javadocs for this. I hope to have an RC out once these
jiras
>> get
>> > in.
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > Vikram.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Vaibhav Gumashta <
>> > vgumas...@hortonworks.com
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi Vikram,
>> > >
>> > > I'd like to get this in: HIVE-8890
>> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-8890> [HiveServer2
dynamic
>> > > service discovery: use persistent ephemeral nodes curator
recipe].
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > --Vaibhav
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 9:29 PM, Alan Gates
<ga...@hortonworks.com
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I'd really like to get HIVE-8966 in there, since it breaks
streaming
>> > > > ingest. The patch is ready to go, it's just waiting on a
review,
>> which
>> > > > Owen has promised to do soon.
>> > > >
>> > > > Alan.
>> > > >
>> > > > Vikram Dixit K <vikram.di...@gmail.com>
>> > > > January 19, 2015 at 18:53
>> > > > Hi All,
>> > > >
>> > > > I am going to be creating the branch 1.0 as mentioned
earlier,
>> > tomorrow.
>> > > I
>> > > > have the following list of jiras that I want to get committed
to
the
>> > > branch
>> > > > before creating an RC.
>> > > >
>> > > > HIVE-9112
>> > > > HIVE-6997 : Delete hive server 1
>> > > > HIVE-8485
>> > > > HIVE-9053
>> > > >
>> > > > Please let me know if you would like me to include any other
jiras.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks
>> > > > Vikram.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Vikram Dixit K <
>> > vikram.di...@gmail.com>
>> > > > <vikram.di...@gmail.com>
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Thejas Nair <the...@hortonworks.com>
>> > > > January 1, 2015 at 10:23
>> > > > Yes, 1.0 is a good opportunity to remove some of the
deprecated
>> > > > components. The change to remove HiveServer1 is already there
in
>> trunk
>> > > > , we should include that.
>> > > > We can also use 1.0 release to clarify the public vs private
status
>> of
>> > > > some of the APIs.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks for the reminder about the documentation status of
1.0. I
will
>> > > > look at some of them.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Lefty Leverenz
>> > > >
>> > > > Lefty Leverenz <leftylever...@gmail.com>
>> > > > December 31, 2014 at 0:12
>> > > > Oh, now I get it. The 1.0.0 *branch* of Hive. Okay.
>> > > >
>> > > > -- Lefty
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 11:43 PM, Lefty Leverenz <
>> > > leftylever...@gmail.com>
>> > > > <leftylever...@gmail.com>
>> > > >
>> > > > Lefty Leverenz <leftylever...@gmail.com>
>> > > > December 30, 2014 at 23:43
>> > > > I thought x.x.# releases were just for fixups, x.#.x could
include
>> new
>> > > > features, and #.x.x were major releases that might have some
>> > > > backward-incompatible changes. But I guess we haven't agreed
on
that.
>> > > >
>> > > > As for documentation, we still have 84 jiras with TODOC14
labels
>> > > >
>> > > > <
>> > >
>> >
>>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC14
>> > > >
>> > > > <
>> > >
>> >
>>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC14
>> > > >
>> > > > .
>> > > > Not to mention 25 TODOC13 labels
>> > > >
>> > > > <
>> > >
>> >
>>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC13
>> > > >
>> > > > <
>> > >
>> >
>>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC13
>> > > >
>> > > > ,
>> > > > eleven TODOC12
>> > > >
>> > > > <
>> > >
>> >
>>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC12
>> > > >
>> > > > <
>> > >
>> >
>>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC12
>> > > >
>> > > > ,
>> > > > seven TODOC11
>> > > >
>> > > > <
>> > >
>> >
>>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC11
>> > > >
>> > > > <
>> > >
>> >
>>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC11
>> > > >
>> > > > ,
>> > > > and seven TODOC10
>> > > >
>> > > > <
>> > >
>> >
>>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC10
>> > > >
>> > > > <
>> > >
>> >
>>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC10
>> > > >
>> > > > .
>> > > >
>> > > > That's 134 doc tasks to finish for a Hive 1.0.0 release --
preferably
>> > by
>> > > > the release date, not after. Because expectations are higher
for
>> 1.0.0
>> > > > releases.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > -- Lefty
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Vikram Dixit K <
>> > vikram.di...@gmail.com>
>> > > > <vikram.di...@gmail.com>
>> > > >
>> > > > Vikram Dixit K <vikram.di...@gmail.com>
>> > > > December 30, 2014 at 17:23
>> > > > Hi Folks,
>> > > >
>> > > > Given that there have been a number of fixes that have gone
into
>> branch
>> > > > 0.14 in the past 8 weeks, I would like to make a release
of
0.14.1
>> > soon.
>> > > I
>> > > > would like to fix some of the release issues as well this
time
>> around.
>> > I
>> > > am
>> > > > thinking of some time around 15th January for getting a RC
out.
>> Please
>> > > let
>> > > > me know if you have any concerns. Also, from a previous
thread,
I
>> would
>> > > > like to make this release the 1.0 branch of hive. The process
for
>> > getting
>> > > > jiras into this release is going to be the same as the
previous
one
>> > viz.:
>> > > >
>> > > > 1. Mark the jira with fix version 0.14.1 and update the
status
to
>> > > > blocker/critical.
>> > > > 2. If a committer +1s the patch for 0.14.1, it is good to
go in.
>> Please
>> > > > mention me in the jira in case you are not sure if the jira
should
>> make
>> > > it
>> > > > for 0.14.1.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks
>> > > > Vikram.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>> > > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the
individual
or
>> > entity
>> > > > to which it is addressed and may contain information that
is
>> > > confidential,
>> > > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
If
the
>> > reader
>> > > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
>> notified
>> > > that
>> > > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution,
disclosure
or
>> > > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you
have
>> > > > received this communication in error, please contact the
sender
>> > > immediately
>> > > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>> > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual
or
>> entity
>> > to
>> > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is
confidential,
>> > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If
the
>> reader
>> > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified
>> > that
>> > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure
or
>> > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
have
>> > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
>> > immediately
>> > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Nothing better than when appreciated for hard work.
>> > -Mark
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Eugene
>>
>> --
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
entity to
>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
confidential,
>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
reader
>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified
that
>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
have
>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
immediately
>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>>
--
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
entity
to
which it is addressed and may contain information that is
confidential,
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please contact the sender
immediately
and delete it from your system. Thank You.
--
Nothing better than when appreciated for hard work.
-Mark
--
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
and delete it from your system. Thank You.
