sqoop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexander Alten-Lorenz <wget.n...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Sqoop 2 first cut
Date Wed, 05 Dec 2012 10:13:02 GMT
Hi Jarcec,

Thanks for the explanation, make sense. Agree fully and +1 for a release.

Thanks,
 Alex

On Dec 2, 2012, at 5:46 PM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho <jarcec@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi Alex,
> I had several reasons when I've suggested this approach. Firstly, for versions like 2.0.0-alpha
I would expect to get 2.0.0 (without -alpha) soon and without major changes. This won't be
case for Sqoop as we might need to do major, backward compatibility changes - it's undesirable
to introduce backward incompatible between minor revisions. We also most likely will release
several version before leaving alpha state, which might cause issues to see what is and what
is not considered stable. Also this first cut is very far from something that might be called
Sqoop 2, it contain just very basic set of functionality without several most important goals
of Sqoop 2. However I'm aware that Hadoop is following this path [1].
> 
> Please note that I did not invented this idea. For example KDE project [2] is using very
similar approach for quite some time by now as you can see on their archive [3]. Versions
like 4.8.90 or 4.8.95 are "pre-releases" for 4.9. Another example would be Ubuntu one client
[4]. I would recommend taking a look on  my original proposal as it contains all the information
[5].
> 
> Links:
> 1 :http://mirror.nexcess.net/apache/hadoop/common/hadoop-2.0.1-alpha/ 
> 2: http://kde.org/
> 3: http://download.kde.org/unstable/
> 4: https://launchpad.net/ubuntuone-client/stable-4-0
> 5: http://markmail.org/message/5jygqqy3oryxqdib
> 
> On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 03:43:38PM +0100, Alexander Alten-Lorenz wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> great.
>> Why not not use a 2.0.0.alpha version or something like that? The could be 2.1.x
the first stable release. 1.99 could cause some irritation in future dialogs (1.xx vs. 2.xx).
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Alex
>> 
>> On Dec 2, 2012, at 2:17 AM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho <jarcec@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Sqoop fellow developers,
>>> it seems that basic import and export functionality in Sqoop 2 will be very soon
covered. Having said that I would like to propose doing "first cut" release of Sqoop 2. My
motivation to provide early bits is to get feedback from actual users as soon as possible,
so that we can incorporate good ideas before it will become too expensive.
>>> 
>>> As we've discussed in the past [1] -  I would like to propose version number
1.99.1. I believe that this version number implies that it's very far from current stable
1.4 version and very very near to 2.0, but it's not 2.0 yet. I would also like to volunteer
to be the release manager for this first cut of Sqoop 2 branch.
>>> 
>>> I'm happy to hear other's thoughts!
>>> 
>>> Jarcec
>>> 
>>> Links:
>>> 1: http://markmail.org/message/5jygqqy3oryxqdib
>> 
>> --
>> Alexander Alten-Lorenz
>> http://mapredit.blogspot.com
>> German Hadoop LinkedIn Group: http://goo.gl/N8pCF
>> 

--
Alexander Alten-Lorenz
http://mapredit.blogspot.com
German Hadoop LinkedIn Group: http://goo.gl/N8pCF


Mime
View raw message