sqoop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Abraham Elmahrek <...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: Sqoop 1.4.6 release lacking 0.20 artifacts
Date Wed, 06 May 2015 16:51:35 GMT
Hmm let's close this thread. Do we need an official vote thread? Or can we
move forward without it?

On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 12:49 PM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho <jarcec@apache.org>
wrote:

> +1 on continuing with the release without 0.20 artifacts
>
> The Hadoop 0.20 profile is actually not Apache Hadoop 0.20, it’s specific
> to CDH3 instead [1]. It’s there from the time when Sqoop was Cloudera
> project running on github and we’ve just not updated it since then. Knowing
> that those bits might not work on pure Apache Hadoop 0.20, I would even go
> as far as dropping that profile completely if nobody objects.
>
> Jarcec
>
> Links:
> 1: https://github.com/apache/sqoop/blob/trunk/build.xml#L126
>
> > On May 4, 2015, at 11:40 AM, Venkat Ranganathan <
> vranganathan@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> >
> > +1.  Good work identifying this Gwen.
> >
> > If this is an issue, we can remedy it in 1.4.7
> >
> > Venkat
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 5/4/15, 11:29 AM, "Abraham Elmahrek" <abe@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I'm +1 on this. I doubt there are many users of 0.20 these days.
> >>
> >> On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Gwen Shapira <gshapira@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Sqoop Developers,
> >>>
> >>> There was a slight oversight on my part as a release mentor and Sqoop
> 1.4.6
> >>> passed a vote with 0.20 artifacts missing.
> >>>
> >>> I suggest that since the vote passed, we can release the artifacts we
> voted
> >>> on, even though 0.20 is missing. Under the assumption that if 0.20 was
> >>> critical, the issue would be raised during the voting process (I
> believe
> >>> 0.20 is pretty much extinct by now).
> >>>
> >>> Any objections?
> >>>
> >>> Gwen
> >>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message