hadoop-common-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Wang <andrew.w...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: Looking to a Hadoop 3 release
Date Tue, 03 Mar 2015 15:46:23 GMT
Hi Konst, thanks for taking a look. I think I essentially agree with your

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.hadoop@gmail.com>

> Andrew,
> Hadoop 3 seems in general like a good idea to me.
> 1. I did not understand if you propose to release 3.0 instead of 2.7 or in
> addition?
>    I think 2.7 is needed at least as a stabilization step for the 2.x line.
> I agree with this, 2.7 is needed, and I think Vinod/Arun are working on it

I expect branch-2 to be maintained for a while yet, separate from a

> 2. If Hadoop 3 and 2.x are meant to exist together, we run a risk to
> manifest split-brain behavior again, as we had with hadoop-1, hadoop-2 and
> other versions. If that somehow beneficial for commercial vendors, which I
> don't see how, for the community it was proven to be very disruptive. Would
> be really good to avoid it this time.
> My motivations here are purely what I've stated above. I remember the pain
of the branch-1 days as well, and this would be a far, far smaller
difference. JDK8 min version and classpath isolation are compelling, yet
incompatible, which is why I'm proposing Hadoop 3. Besides those two
features, it should be approximately the same "size" as our 2.x releases.

> 3. Could we release Hadoop 3 directly from trunk? With a proper feature
> freeze in advance. Current trunk is in the best working condition I've seen
> in years - much better, than when hadoop-2 was coming to life. It could
> make a good alpha.
> I believe we can start planning 3.0 from trunk right after 2.7 is out.

I agree with this, and would be okay with this if our audit of trunk
reveals no incompatible changes we're uncomfortable releasing.

I'll note though that committing to multiple branches is way easier now
with git and cherry-pick, so that overhead is reduced. Rolling out an alpha
now is strictly a good thing for our downstreams, even if it means we need
to do extra commits.


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