Re: [DISCUSS] What is the purpose of merge vote threads?

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Doug Cutting wrote: > Here's my take, FWIW. The entire project needs to determine whether > it is willing to take on the maintenance of code developed in a > branch. This vote needs the widest audience. On the other hand, > discussion on the umbrella Jira for t

Re: [VOTE] Merge HDFS-4949 to trunk

I don't necessarily disagree with the general questions about the procedural issues of merge votes. Thanks for bringing that up in the other thread you mentioned. To some extent it seems like much of this has been based on custom, and if folks feel that more precisely defining the merge vote proces

[jira] [Created] (HADOOP-10070) RPC client doesn't use per-connection conf to determine server's expected Kerberos principal name

Aaron T. Myers created HADOOP-10070: --- Summary: RPC client doesn't use per-connection conf to determine server's expected Kerberos principal name Key: HADOOP-10070 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOO

[jira] [Resolved] (HADOOP-10069) Not need to start secondary namenode upon NN HA?

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10069?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Raymond Liu resolved HADOOP-10069. -- Resolution: Duplicate > Not need to start secondary namenode upon NN HA? > --

[jira] [Created] (HADOOP-10069) Not need to start secondary namenode upon NN HA?

Raymond Liu created HADOOP-10069: Summary: Not need to start secondary namenode upon NN HA? Key: HADOOP-10069 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10069 Project: Hadoop Common Is

Re: [DISCUSS] What is the purpose of merge vote threads?

(Resend) No.  In the past, committers would merge a branch once the merge vote had been passed even there were problems in the branch.  Below is my understanding of merge vote. Feature branch merge votes is the same as the traditional code review-commit process except that it requires three +1

Re: [VOTE] Merge HDFS-4949 to trunk

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Chris Nauroth wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > I've come to the conclusion that I'm very confused about merge votes. :-) > It's not just about HDFS-4949. I'm confused about all merge votes. > Rather than muddy the waters here, I've started a separate discussion on > com

Re: [DISCUSS] What is the purpose of merge vote threads?

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Chris Nauroth wrote: > When the voting happens on jira with a finalized merge patch, I know > exactly what I'm voting for, because it's the same review-and-commit > process that we follow every day with the extra requirement of 3 +1s. When > it happens on email, i

Re: [DISCUSS] What is the purpose of merge vote threads?

Hi Aaron, Thanks for pointing this out. I hadn't seen it, but I just caught up. This proposal states that 3 binding +1 votes are required for a branch merge, which makes sense to me. My confusion arises from the fact that I've seen the voting happening in 2 different places in 2 different ways

Re: [DISCUSS] What is the purpose of merge vote threads?

Hi Chris, Have you read the original thread on general@ which added this to the bylaws? At the beginning of that thread, Jakob provided some rationale for the branch merge vote and requiring three +1s. Link to that vote thread here: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201107.m

Re: [VOTE] Merge HDFS-4949 to trunk

Hi Andrew, I've come to the conclusion that I'm very confused about merge votes. :-) It's not just about HDFS-4949. I'm confused about all merge votes. Rather than muddy the waters here, I've started a separate discussion on common-dev. I do agree with the general plan outlined here, and I wi

[DISCUSS] What is the purpose of merge vote threads?

I've realized that I'm very confused about the purpose and the process of merge votes. I'd like to use this thread for clarification so that we all know exactly what our votes on a merge thread mean. It's possible that we'll even want to reconsider whether or not merge vote threads are useful. >

Re: [VOTE] Merge HDFS-4949 to trunk

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:18 AM, Andrew Wang wrote: > Right now we're on track to have all of those things done by tomorrow. > Since the remaining issues are either not technical or do not involve major > changes, I was hoping we could +1 this merge vote in the spirit of "+1 > pending jenkins". We

[jira] [Created] (HADOOP-10068) Improve log4j regex in testFindContainingJar

Robert Rati created HADOOP-10068: Summary: Improve log4j regex in testFindContainingJar Key: HADOOP-10068 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10068 Project: Hadoop Common Issue

[jira] [Created] (HADOOP-10067) Missing POM dependency on jsr305

Robert Rati created HADOOP-10067: Summary: Missing POM dependency on jsr305 Key: HADOOP-10067 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10067 Project: Hadoop Common Issue Type: Improv

Build failed in Jenkins: Hadoop-Common-trunk #931

See Changes: [jeagles] HADOOP-10064. Upgrade to maven antrun plugin version 1.7 (Arpit Agarwal via jeagles) [kihwal] HDFS-5341. Reduce fsdataset lock duration during directory scanning. Contributed by Qus-Jiawei. [jing9] HDFS-536