On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 05:30PM, Chris Douglas wrote: > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote: > > There's no plans to release anything else at this point - this is a bug-fix > > release, as I pointed out on a numerous occasions. There's no new features - > > just 2 fixes. > > If you're worried about extending the voting by a week, I don't think > anyone can reasonably object to a truncated schedule if the only > change is the version number. Downstream fixes discovered in Bigtop > are a sufficient reason for a patch release and I think we'd all like > them to become routine. Not just in 2.0.x, but in later release > branches.
I have no issues of changing the version to 2.0.5-alpha and restarting to vote for the release content, e.g. 2 bug fixes. Shall I call 3 days re-vote because of the number change? > > 2.0.5 matter became and still is too controversial at some point. The vote > > started by Arun to override the results of the Konstantin's vote never been > > closed. > > For the nth time, neither release plan vote was binding. We recently > amended the bylaws to eliminate this confusion. There is no ambiguity > between votes when neither is in scope. Does the result of bylaw vote nullifies the unfinished vote started by Arun? Sorry, I am dense, apparently. > > The downstream projects are handing in the middle of the air because > > of that confusion. > > Can we please ground our discussion when discussing compatibility and > bugs? Breathless alarm is not proportional to the severity, here. Good point. Can we limit the vote thread to the merits of the release then? > > Have I missed something or you just called me a cheater and a lair right to > > my face? > > I called you neither. The prenominate votes were closed, counted, and > declared to be binding over objections. I'm annoyed that I have to > toggle my vote to prevent that tactic, but based on recent experience > I don't expect you to forgo it. I'd be happy to learn my caution is > unnecessary. -C That sound like adding an insult to injury, if my forth-language skills do not mislead me. Cos > >> > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 01:48PM, Chris Douglas wrote: > >> >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Arun C Murthy <a...@hortonworks.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > Why not include MAPREDUCE-4211 as well rather than create one release > >> >> > per patch? > >> >> > >> >> From Cos's description, it sounded like these were backports of fixes > >> >> to help Sqoop2 and fix some build issues. If it's not just to fixup > >> >> leftover bugs in 2.0.4 *once* so downstream projects can integrate > >> >> against 2.0.4.1, and this a release series, then I've completely > >> >> misunderstood the purpose. > >> >> > >> >> Cos, are you planning 2.0.4.2? > >> >> > >> >> > Also, this is the first time we are seeing a four-numbered scheme in > >> >> > Hadoop. Why not call this 2.0.5-alpha? > >> >> > >> >> Good point. Since it contains only backports from branch-2, it would > >> >> make sense for it to be an intermediate release. > >> >> > >> >> I shouldn't have to say this, but I'm changing my vote to -1 while we > >> >> work this out. -C > >> >> > >> >> > On May 24, 2013, at 8:48 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> All, > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I have created a release candidate (rc0) for hadoop-2.0.4.1-alpha > >> >> >> that I would > >> >> >> like to release. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> This is a stabilization release that includes fixed for a couple a > >> >> >> of issues > >> >> >> discovered in the testing with BigTop 0.6.0 release candidate. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> The RC is available at: > >> >> >> http://people.apache.org/~cos/hadoop-2.0.4.1-alpha-rc0/ > >> >> >> The RC tag in svn is here: > >> >> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/hadoop/common/tags/release-2.0.4.1-alpha-rc0 > >> >> >> > >> >> >> The maven artifacts are available via repository.apache.org. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Please try the release bits and vote; the vote will run for the > >> >> >> usual 7 days. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Thanks for your voting > >> >> >> Cos > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> >
