Im not a fan of this our feature branching was supposed to protect us from broken trumk syndrome.
I am a believer in releaseable trunk. Make it work and keep it working. On Friday, March 3, 2017, Sergey Shelukhin <ser...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > Can we at least release 2.2 first? There’s massive amount of unreleased > code right now on master. > > On 17/3/3, 13:50, "Ashutosh Chauhan" <hashut...@apache.org <javascript:;>> > wrote: > > >Hi all, > > > >Hive project has come a long way. With wide-spread adoption also comes > >expectations. Expectation of being backward compatible and not breaking > >things. However that doesn't come free of cost and results in lot of > >legacy > >code which can't be refactored without fear of breaking things. As a > >result > >project has accumulated lot of debt over time. At the same time there are > >also lot of features which have seen little uptake. We may want to drop > >some of those. > > > >In order to move forward and shed that debt we may need a major version > >release which allows us to make backward incompatible changes and drop > >rarely used features. At the same time there are lots of users which are > >consuming currently released 2.1 , 2.2 branches and expect them to stay on > >it for some time. So, I propose that we create branch-2 from current tip > >and do future 2.x releases from that branch and keep it backward > >compatible. This will allow devs to land breaking changes on master and > >pave way to release hive 3.0 in future. > > > >Ofcourse, each specific incompatible change and feature drop even on > >master need to be evaluated on its own merit on corresponding jira. This > >email is just a solicitation of feedback for creating branch-2 and > >allowing > >breaking changes in master. Thoughts? > > > >Thanks, > >Ashutosh > > -- Sorry this was sent from mobile. Will do less grammar and spell check than usual.
