FAQ
nvm, it is there already.
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Enis Söztutar wrote:

Mikhail, I suggest that we create the branch-1.3 now so that you can
control what goes in and what not. branch-1 is free for all usually.

Enis
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 9:24 PM, Mikhail Antonov wrote:

Suddenly we had kind of a spike in jiras filed with fixVersion=1.3 last
few
days, and I really want to get it out one of this days, so I want to just
stabilize it now.

I kicked some jiras labeled as "major" out of 1.3, and if there's
something
affecting branch-1.3 but not "Blocker" or "Critical" let's target it for
1.3.1 and / or 1.4.

Thanks!
Mikhail

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Mikhail Antonov <olorinbant@gmail.com>
wrote:
I'm not aware of any, and changes made to 1.3 shouldn't render 2.4
unsupportable.

On the second thought, if we want to have to maintain less minor releases
in 1.* line and encourage folks to update,
we need to keep maintaining those Hadoop versions, yeah.

Let's leave 2.4 as supported.

-Mikhail

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 7:11 AM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Mikhail Antonov <olorinbant@gmail.com
wrote:
I'm thinking to move Hadoop 2.4.* from Supported to Not Tested, to
kind
of
encourage people to move and have less versions to test. How many
people
want to stick with Hadoop 2.4 yet upgrade to HBase 1.3?
Hadoop 2.4 is still considered a "safe bet" stable release for those
in LTM mode.

Our compatibility guidelines say that we won't force an incompatible
dependency
upgrade in a minor version. Do we know if Hadoop 2.4 -> 2.5 includes
any
documented incompatibilities?

--
busbey


--
Thanks,
Michael Antonov


--
Thanks,
Michael Antonov

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts

Previous

Follow ups

Related Discussions

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2019 Grokbase