Re: 1.1 release (was Re: 0.15 release)

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Thejas Nair wrote: > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Brock Noland wrote: > > > Additionally if you find blockers that you would like in 1.2, please > > have them committed to trunk and ping me to merge them to 1.2. > > > > > Brock, I assume you meant 1.1 (not 1

Re: 1.1 release (was Re: 0.15 release)

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Brock Noland wrote: > Additionally if you find blockers that you would like in 1.2, please > have them committed to trunk and ping me to merge them to 1.2. > > Brock, I assume you meant 1.1 (not 1.2) in above sentence. -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE NOTICE: This mes

Re: 1.1 release (was Re: 0.15 release)

Hi, As I mentioned before, my main concern was that the 1.0 release would block the next release from trunk. Since we are in the RC phase for 1.0, this doesn't seem likely. As such, I am ok with moving forward with the 1.x naming scheme. As such I have: * Renamed "next" to "branch-1.1" * Updated

Re: 0.15 release

Hi Alan, Thank you very much for the clarification. Naming the branch "next" for now is fine with me. I've done so. Cheers, Brock On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Alan Gates wrote: > I'm not asking you to slow the work for the release. If you want to > branch, you can branch. What I'm askin

Re: 0.15 release

I'm not asking you to slow the work for the release. If you want to branch, you can branch. What I'm asking is to hold on the numbering scheme. So you could name the branch 'next' or something and then rename once we come to agreement. Consensus in the community is important, and we should

Re: 0.15 release

>From a different perspective, 0.14.1/0.15 proposal allow us to release independently and concurrently. Once they are leased, we can have a consented 1.0 release. On the other hand, 1.0/1.1 would force us to wait to release 1.1 after 1.0 is released. This dependency seems artificial and can be avo

Re: 0.15 release

Hi Alan, In all of my experience at Apache, I have been encouraged to release. Contributors rightly want to see their hard work gets in the hands of the users. That's why they contribute after all. Many contributors who have features in trunk would like get those features out into the community. T

Re: 0.15 release

Brock, Given there isn't consensus on numbering yet, could you holding off making the 0.15 branch. We should come to a conclusion on whether we're doing 0.14.1/0.15 or 1.0/1.1 before assigning anymore numbers. Alan. Brock Noland January 20, 2015 at 21:25 Just a

Re: 0.15 release

Just a reminder that I plan on branching on 1/26/2015 and start rolling release candidates on 2/9/2015. After branching I plan on merging only blockers. Brock On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Brock Noland wrote: > Hi, > > Projects are instructed in the incubator that releases gain new users and

Re: 0.15 release

Yes I thinking the same, quarterly releases and branching for 0.15 in a month or two. On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Thejas Nair wrote: > Brock, > When you say more frequent releases, what schedule do you have in mind > ? I think a (approximately) quarterly release cycle would be good. > We bran

Re: 0.15 release

Brock, When you say more frequent releases, what schedule do you have in mind ? I think a (approximately) quarterly release cycle would be good. We branched for hive 0.14 on Sept 25, which means we have been adding new features not in 0.14 for more than 2 months. How about branching for 0.15 equiva

Re: 0.15 release

+1 . Regarding the next version being 0.15 - I have some thoughts on the versioning of hive. I will start a different thread on that. On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Brock Noland wrote: > Hi, > > In 2014 we did two large releases. Thank you very much to the RM's for > pushing those out! I've fo