RE: [DISCUSS] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

Thanks Arun. +1 Regards, Uma -Original Message- From: Arun C. Murthy [mailto:a...@hortonworks.com] Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2014 11:07 PM To: hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org Cc: common-dev@hadoop.apache.org; yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org; mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS

[VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

Folks, As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change release votes from 7 days to 5. I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. Please vote, the vote will the usual period of 7 days. thanks, Arun [main]$ svn diff Index: author/src/documentation/conte

[jira] [Created] (HADOOP-10744) LZ4 Compression fails to recognize PowerPC Little Endian Architecture

Ayappan created HADOOP-10744: Summary: LZ4 Compression fails to recognize PowerPC Little Endian Architecture Key: HADOOP-10744 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10744 Project: Hadoop Commo

Build failed in Jenkins: Hadoop-Common-trunk #1149

See Changes: [wheat9] HDFS-6562. Refactor rename() in FSDirectory. Contributed by Haohui Mai. [arp] HADOOP-10659. Refactor AccessControlList to reuse utility functions and to improve performance. (Contributed by Benoy Antony) [ji

[jira] [Created] (HADOOP-10745) Improve the delete key rest api of KMS

liyunzhang created HADOOP-10745: --- Summary: Improve the delete key rest api of KMS Key: HADOOP-10745 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10745 Project: Hadoop Common Issue Type: Im

Re: Don't want to receive the mails again

Thanks sandy, but it seems some problems; when i send email to unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org, i received following message: Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently: unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org Technical details of permanent failure: Google tried to deliver your message, b

RE: Don't want to receive the mails again

Yups same here -Original Message- From: WangYu [mailto:wangyu0...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 6:00 PM To: common-dev@hadoop.apache.org Subject: Re: Don't want to receive the mails again Thanks sandy, but it seems some problems; when i send email to unsubscr...@hadoop.ap

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 Tom On 6/24/14, 3:53 AM, "Arun C Murthy" wrote: >Folks, > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change >release votes from 7 days to 5. > > I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. > > Please vote, the vote will the usual period of 7 days. > >thanks, >A

Re: Don't want to receive the mails again

Please take a look at http://hadoop.apache.org/mailing_lists.html#Developers Use the unsubscribe link. Cheers On Jun 24, 2014, at 5:29 AM, WangYu wrote: > Thanks sandy, but it seems some problems; > when i send email to unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org, i received following > message: > > Del

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 6:42 AM, Thomas Graves < tgra...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid> wrote: > +1 > > Tom > > On 6/24/14, 3:53 AM, "Arun C Murthy" wrote: > > >Folks, > > > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > >release votes from 7 days to 5. > > > > I've atta

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 Thanks Devaraj K On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > Folks, > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > release votes from 7 days to 5. > > I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. > > Please vote, the vote will the usual pe

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 0.23.11

+1 (non-binding) Deployed in a two node cluster and ran few M/R Jobs, everything works fine. On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 8:44 PM, Thomas Graves < tgra...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid> wrote: > Hey Everyone, > > There have been various bug fixes that have went into > branch-0.23 since the 0.23.10 releas

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (binding) -Sandy On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Devaraj K wrote: > +1 > > Thanks > Devaraj K > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Arun C Murthy > wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > > release votes from 7 days to 5. > >

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (binding) Jason On 06/24/2014 03:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: Folks, As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change release votes from 7 days to 5. I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. Please vote, the vote will the usual period of 7 days. tha

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 0.23.11

+1 (binding) Verified signatures Verified native compilation on Ubuntu and ran some sample jobs. jeagles On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Devaraj K wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > > > Deployed in a two node cluster and ran few M/R Jobs, everything works fine. > > > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 8:

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (non-binding) On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Jason Lowe wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Jason > > > On 06/24/2014 03:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change >> release votes from 7 days to 5. >> >> I've attached th

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (non-binding) I like the idea! Thanks, Mit Desai On 6/24/14, 3:53 AM, "Arun C Murthy" wrote: >Folks, > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change >release votes from 7 days to 5. > > I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. > > Please vote, the v

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (binding) — Hitesh On Jun 24, 2014, at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > Folks, > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > release votes from 7 days to 5. > > I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. > > Please vote, the vote will the usual pe

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1(non-binding) On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:55 AM, Hitesh Shah wrote: > +1 (binding) > > — Hitesh > > On Jun 24, 2014, at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change >> release votes from 7 days to 5. >> >> I've attached

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (binding) -- Aaron T. Myers Software Engineer, Cloudera On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > Folks, > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > release votes from 7 days to 5. > > I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. > >

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (non-binding) On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: > +1 (binding) > > -- > Aaron T. Myers > Software Engineer, Cloudera > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy > wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to chan

[jira] [Created] (HADOOP-10747) Support configurable retries on SASL connection failures in RPC client.

Chris Nauroth created HADOOP-10747: -- Summary: Support configurable retries on SASL connection failures in RPC client. Key: HADOOP-10747 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10747 Project

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (non-binding) (2014/06/24 10:33), Zhijie Shen wrote: +1 (non-binding) On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: +1 (binding) -- Aaron T. Myers Software Engineer, Cloudera On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: Folks, As discussed, I'd like to call a v

[jira] [Created] (HADOOP-10748) HttpServer2 should not load JspServlet

Haohui Mai created HADOOP-10748: --- Summary: HttpServer2 should not load JspServlet Key: HADOOP-10748 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10748 Project: Hadoop Common Issue Type: Bu

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (binding) On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Zhijie Shen wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: > > > +1 (binding) > > > > -- > > Aaron T. Myers > > Software Engineer, Cloudera > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy > > wro

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (binding) Chris Nauroth Hortonworks http://hortonworks.com/ On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Jakob Homan wrote: > +1 (binding) > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Zhijie Shen > wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Aaron T. Myers > wrote: > > > >

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 -C On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > Folks, > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > release votes from 7 days to 5. > > I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. > > Please vote, the vote will the usual period of 7 days.

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Chris Douglas wrote: > +1 -C > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy > wrote: > > Folks, > > > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > release votes from 7 days to 5. > > > > I've attached the change to by-la

Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

Hi all, Forking this thread as requested by Vinod. To help anyone who's catching up with this thread, I've written up a wiki page containing what I think are the proposals under discussion. I did my very best to make this as fact-based and disinterested as possible; I really appreciate the constru

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

Andrew thanks for writing the proposal. In the proposal you mention: "Dropping support for a JDK in a minor release is incompatible, so this would require a change to our compatibility guidelines." Why is dropping a JDK incompatible? sanjay On Jun 24, 2014, at 11:17 AM, Andrew Wang wro

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

Andrew, Thanks for starting this thread. I'll edit the wiki to provide more context around rolling-upgrades etc. which, as I pointed out in the original thread, are key IMHO. On Jun 24, 2014, at 11:17 AM, Andrew Wang wrote: > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/MovingToJdk7and8 > > I think based

[jira] [Reopened] (HADOOP-10468) TestMetricsSystemImpl.testMultiThreadedPublish fails intermediately

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10468?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Jason Lowe reopened HADOOP-10468: - Reopening this issue as it breaks all existing metrics2 property files. Before this change the pr

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

That classpath policy was explicitly added because we can't lock down our dependencies for security/bug fix reasons, and also because if we do update something explicitly, their transitive dependencies can change -beyond our control. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-9555 is an example

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

Tx for the new thread Andrew, hopefully it can attract more eyes. Here's what I am behind - a modified proposal C. - Overall I wouldn't think about EOL of JDK7 and/or JDK8 specifically given how long it has taken for JDK6 life-cycle to end. We should try to focus on JDK7 only for now. - As we

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 Vinod On Jun 24, 2014, at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > Folks, > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > release votes from 7 days to 5. > > I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. > > Please vote, the vote will the usual period of 7 days.

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

While we haven't codified this in our compatibility guidelines, dropping a Java version seems to me like change that needs to happen alongside a major release. In plain talk, it has the ability to break everything for users who aren't doing anything particularly unreasonable. I don't think we sho

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

Hi all, On dependencies, we've bumped library versions when we think it's safe and the APIs in the new version are compatible. Or, it's not leaked to the app classpath (e.g the JUnit version bump). I think the JIRAs Arun mentioned fall into one of those categories. Steve can do a better job explai

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

After reading this thread and thinking a bit about it, I think it should be OK such move up to JDK7 in Hadoop 2 for the following reasons: * Existing Hadoop 2 releases and related projects are running on JDK7 in production. * Commercial vendors of Hadoop have already done lot of work to ensure

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

Hello, I do know scenarios which involve sticking with Java 6. Mostly related to supporting Applications Servers of (Big) 3 Letter companies (both). I dont see that in an Hadoop cluster. Especially given that expressiveness of Java 8 and also Performance of Java 7 are both important in Big Data

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

+1, though I think 2.5 may be premature if we want to send a warning note "last ever". That's an issue for followon "when in branch 2". Guava and protobuf.jar are two things we have to leave alone, with the first being unfortunate, but their attitude to updates is pretty dramatic. The latter? We a

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

Alejandro, On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur wrote: > After reading this thread and thinking a bit about it, I think it should be > OK such move up to JDK7 in Hadoop 2 for the following reasons: > > * Existing Hadoop 2 releases and related projects are running > on JDK7 in p

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

On Jun 24, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Andrew Wang wrote: > Since Hadoop apps can and do depend on the Hadoop classpath, the classpath > is effectively part of our API. I'm sure there are user apps out there that > will break if we make incompatible changes to the classpath. I haven't read > up on the MR