On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Arun C Murthy <a...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> I apologize if there was too much technical details. > > The simplified version is that hadoop-2 isn't baked as it stands today, > and is not viable to be supported by this community in a stable manner. In > particular, it is due to the move to PB for HDFS protocols and the freshly > minted YARN apis/protocols. As a result, we have been forced to make > (incompatible) changes in every hadoop-2 release so far (2.0.0, 2.0.2 > etc.). Since we released the previous bits we have found security issues, > bugs and other issues which will cause long-term maintenance harm (details > are in the HADOOP/HDFS/YARN jiras in the original email). > > My aim, as the RM, is to try nudge (nay, force) all contributors to spend > time over the next couple of months focussing on fixing known issues and to > look for other surprises - this way I hope to ensure we do not have further > incompatible changes for downstream projects and we can support hadoop-2 > for at least a couple of years. I hope this makes sense to you. I don't > think turning around and calling these 3.x or 4.x makes things better since > no amount of numbering lipstick will make the software better or viable for > the long-term for both users and other projects. Worse, it will force HBase > and other projects to deal with *even more* major Hadoop releases... which > seems like a royal pita. > > I hope that clarifies things. Thanks Stack. > Tom above puts his finger on the problem I am having. It seems that the 'hadoop versioning' is arbitrary, flaunts convention, and on top of that is without a discernible pattern (2.0.0 is actually going to be 2.3.0?). It is also tantalizing as it holds out the promise of a 2.0.0 or a 2.1.0, etc., but seemingly these will never ship. Above you call 3.x and 4.x 'numbering liipstick' -- nice one! -- but to this 'casual observer', IMO, it would be more calling a spade a spade; i.e. 3.x.x, a major version change, has API and possibly wire protocol changes in it. Thank you for taking the time to dumb it all down for me Arun, St.Ack
