You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@accumulo.apache.org by John Vines <vi...@apache.org> on 2013/10/25 18:33:59 UTC
Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week away. If
anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please speak up
now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com>.
I'm also happy to be the (non-binding) bad guy who says things are pushed
to 1.6.1 or 1.7.0.
I'd really like to see us on a regular release cadence (ideally per-CY
quarter) so that we'd have an easier time scheduling things like obsoleting
versions.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 1:49 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time. I'll
> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
> >
> > http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues
> >
> > Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
> > ask for one :)
> >
> > --
> > Christopher L Tubbs II
> > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week away.
> > If
> > > anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please speak
> up
> > > now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
> >
>
--
Sean
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by Joey Echeverria <jo...@cloudera.com>.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:49 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time. I'll
> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
+1
-Joey
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
>>
>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues
>>
>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
>> ask for one :)
>>
>> --
>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week away.
>> If
>> > anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please speak up
>> > now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
>>
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by Billie Rinaldi <bi...@gmail.com>.
I applied the patch in
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=accumulo.git;h=789c920 (commented
on the ticket). I've just left it open so we could decide what to do about
different exit codes.
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 2:39 AM, Steve Loughran <st...@hortonworks.com>wrote:
> I'd like this patch looked at; makes it easier to integrate accumulo with
> scripts and controllers, as they can different failures from other outcomes
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-1709
>
>
> On 26 October 2013 03:30, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I went ahead and did one pass, there are 156 of them, 14 of which
> labelled
> > for Documentation. That's 142 at varying levels. I have 15 tabs of
> tickets
> > I will take a stab at over the next week. If everyone can identify
> tickets
> > that they plan to work on this last week so a good idea of what's in
> > progress can be identified, that would be stellar. I'm going to do
> another
> > pass through Monday afternoon with a stronger hand to pare down the list,
> > ideally to under 75.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 4:26 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm going to start going through 1.6 tickets and either bump them to
> 1.7
> > > or question if they should slip if I need more information.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> We should probably declare a release manager for 1.6.0. I don't think
> > the
> > >> feature freeze vote set one (future ones probably should).
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Then they can start pinging people to find out where we are on the
> > >> blockers.
> > >>
> > >> -Sean
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if the
> > >> > features contained within are incomplete.
> > >> >
> > >> > There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that would
> > all
> > >> > fall into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back
> > out
> > >> > large changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug
> > >> fixes"
> > >> > and not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new
> > >> features
> > >> > which I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
> > >> >
> > >> > I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the guy
> > who
> > >> > throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing the
> > >> > quality of our release.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time.
> > I'll
> > >> >> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to
> 1.7.
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-**1.6.0-issues<
> > >> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy
> and
> > >> >>> ask for one :)
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> --
> > >> >>> Christopher L Tubbs II
> > >> >>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week
> > >> away.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>> If
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please
> > >> speak up
> > >> >>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Sean
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> --
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by Steve Loughran <st...@hortonworks.com>.
I'd like this patch looked at; makes it easier to integrate accumulo with
scripts and controllers, as they can different failures from other outcomes
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-1709
On 26 October 2013 03:30, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
> I went ahead and did one pass, there are 156 of them, 14 of which labelled
> for Documentation. That's 142 at varying levels. I have 15 tabs of tickets
> I will take a stab at over the next week. If everyone can identify tickets
> that they plan to work on this last week so a good idea of what's in
> progress can be identified, that would be stellar. I'm going to do another
> pass through Monday afternoon with a stronger hand to pare down the list,
> ideally to under 75.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 4:26 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I'm going to start going through 1.6 tickets and either bump them to 1.7
> > or question if they should slip if I need more information.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> We should probably declare a release manager for 1.6.0. I don't think
> the
> >> feature freeze vote set one (future ones probably should).
> >>
> >>
> >> Then they can start pinging people to find out where we are on the
> >> blockers.
> >>
> >> -Sean
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if the
> >> > features contained within are incomplete.
> >> >
> >> > There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that would
> all
> >> > fall into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back
> out
> >> > large changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug
> >> fixes"
> >> > and not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new
> >> features
> >> > which I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
> >> >
> >> > I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the guy
> who
> >> > throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing the
> >> > quality of our release.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time.
> I'll
> >> >> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-**1.6.0-issues<
> >> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
> >> >>> ask for one :)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> Christopher L Tubbs II
> >> >>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week
> >> away.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>> If
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please
> >> speak up
> >> >>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Sean
> >>
> >
> >
>
--
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
and delete it from your system. Thank You.
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by John Vines <vi...@apache.org>.
I went ahead and did one pass, there are 156 of them, 14 of which labelled
for Documentation. That's 142 at varying levels. I have 15 tabs of tickets
I will take a stab at over the next week. If everyone can identify tickets
that they plan to work on this last week so a good idea of what's in
progress can be identified, that would be stellar. I'm going to do another
pass through Monday afternoon with a stronger hand to pare down the list,
ideally to under 75.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 4:26 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm going to start going through 1.6 tickets and either bump them to 1.7
> or question if they should slip if I need more information.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
>> We should probably declare a release manager for 1.6.0. I don't think the
>> feature freeze vote set one (future ones probably should).
>>
>>
>> Then they can start pinging people to find out where we are on the
>> blockers.
>>
>> -Sean
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if the
>> > features contained within are incomplete.
>> >
>> > There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that would all
>> > fall into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back out
>> > large changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug
>> fixes"
>> > and not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new
>> features
>> > which I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
>> >
>> > I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the guy who
>> > throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing the
>> > quality of our release.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
>> >
>> >> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time. I'll
>> >> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
>> >>>
>> >>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-**1.6.0-issues<
>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues>
>> >>>
>> >>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
>> >>> ask for one :)
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>> >>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week
>> away.
>> >>>>
>> >>> If
>> >>>
>> >>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please
>> speak up
>> >>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sean
>>
>
>
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by John Vines <vi...@apache.org>.
I'm going to start going through 1.6 tickets and either bump them to 1.7 or
question if they should slip if I need more information.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> We should probably declare a release manager for 1.6.0. I don't think the
> feature freeze vote set one (future ones probably should).
>
>
> Then they can start pinging people to find out where we are on the
> blockers.
>
> -Sean
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if the
> > features contained within are incomplete.
> >
> > There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that would all
> > fall into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back out
> > large changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug
> fixes"
> > and not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new features
> > which I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
> >
> > I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the guy who
> > throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing the
> > quality of our release.
> >
> >
> > On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
> >
> >> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time. I'll
> >> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
> >>>
> >>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-**1.6.0-issues<
> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues>
> >>>
> >>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
> >>> ask for one :)
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Christopher L Tubbs II
> >>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week
> away.
> >>>>
> >>> If
> >>>
> >>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please speak
> up
> >>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>
> --
> Sean
>
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com>.
We should probably declare a release manager for 1.6.0. I don't think the
feature freeze vote set one (future ones probably should).
Then they can start pinging people to find out where we are on the blockers.
-Sean
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if the
> features contained within are incomplete.
>
> There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that would all
> fall into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back out
> large changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug fixes"
> and not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new features
> which I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
>
> I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the guy who
> throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing the
> quality of our release.
>
>
> On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
>
>> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time. I'll
>> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
>>>
>>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-**1.6.0-issues<http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues>
>>>
>>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
>>> ask for one :)
>>>
>>> --
>>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week away.
>>>>
>>> If
>>>
>>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please speak up
>>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
--
Sean
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by John Vines <vi...@apache.org>.
So then those changes should be pulled out and put into a feature branch
until they're resolved.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if the
> features contained within are incomplete.
>
> There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that would all
> fall into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back out
> large changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug fixes"
> and not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new features
> which I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
>
> I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the guy who
> throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing the
> quality of our release.
>
>
> On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
>
>> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time. I'll
>> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
>>>
>>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-**1.6.0-issues<http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues>
>>>
>>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
>>> ask for one :)
>>>
>>> --
>>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week away.
>>>>
>>> If
>>>
>>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please speak up
>>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com>.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 5:08 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
> I am concerned about the tickets around 118, as there seem to be a fair
> amount of blockers revolving around it. What's the status of those?
>
I am currently working through them. Working on the garbage collector one
at the moment.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Encryption (rest+motion), Conditional Mutations, Root tablet in its own
> > > table (instead of !METADATA), MiniAccumuloCluster improvements, Shell
> > > improvements (jcommander related), lots of other bug-fixes/improvements
> > and
> > > updates to recent Hadoop versions.
> > >
> >
> > Also ACCUMULO-118 and ACCUMULO-1451
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Those are what pop out at me.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/25/13 12:49 PM, Sean Busbey wrote:
> > >
> > >> Does anyone know off the top of their head the feature(s) that caused
> > 1.6
> > >> to be planned as a major release in the first place?
> > >>
> > >> I see ~180 resolved issues in jira, but we don't appear to have a
> > shortcut
> > >> for flagging things as breaking.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I don't mind putting things off to 1.7 (if necessary). But... if
> 1.6.0
> > >>> isn't sufficiently feature rich, there's not really a reason to
> > >>> release it just yet... until those features are ready. That said, I
> do
> > >>> think there'll be enough features in 1.6.0 to release it as a minor
> > >>> release, if we're interpreting the version as the standard
> > >>> <major>.<minor>.<bugfix> scheme, even if we end up pushing some stuff
> > >>> off to 1.7.
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Christopher L Tubbs II
> > >>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if the
> > >>>> features contained within are incomplete.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that would
> > all
> > >>>>
> > >>> fall
> > >>>
> > >>>> into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back out
> > large
> > >>>> changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug
> fixes"
> > >>>> and
> > >>>> not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new
> features
> > >>>>
> > >>> which
> > >>>
> > >>>> I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the guy
> > who
> > >>>> throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing the
> > >>>>
> > >>> quality
> > >>>
> > >>>> of our release.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time.
> > I'll
> > >>>>> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to
> 1.7.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-**1.6.0-issues<
> > http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy
> and
> > >>>>>> ask for one :)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> Christopher L Tubbs II
> > >>>>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org>
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> away.
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>> If
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please
> > speak
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> up
> > >>>
> > >>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>
RE: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by dl...@comcast.net.
Are you talking about the sub-tasks? The issue is marked as resolved.
Maybe they are done also.
-----Original Message-----
From: John Vines [mailto:vines@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 5:09 PM
To: Accumulo Dev List
Subject: Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
I am concerned about the tickets around 118, as there seem to be a fair
amount of blockers revolving around it. What's the status of those?
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Encryption (rest+motion), Conditional Mutations, Root tablet in its
> > own table (instead of !METADATA), MiniAccumuloCluster improvements,
> > Shell improvements (jcommander related), lots of other
> > bug-fixes/improvements
> and
> > updates to recent Hadoop versions.
> >
>
> Also ACCUMULO-118 and ACCUMULO-1451
>
>
> >
> > Those are what pop out at me.
> >
> >
> > On 10/25/13 12:49 PM, Sean Busbey wrote:
> >
> >> Does anyone know off the top of their head the feature(s) that
> >> caused
> 1.6
> >> to be planned as a major release in the first place?
> >>
> >> I see ~180 resolved issues in jira, but we don't appear to have a
> shortcut
> >> for flagging things as breaking.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I don't mind putting things off to 1.7 (if necessary). But... if
> >> 1.6.0
> >>> isn't sufficiently feature rich, there's not really a reason to
> >>> release it just yet... until those features are ready. That said,
> >>> I do think there'll be enough features in 1.6.0 to release it as a
> >>> minor release, if we're interpreting the version as the standard
> >>> <major>.<minor>.<bugfix> scheme, even if we end up pushing some
> >>> stuff off to 1.7.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Christopher L Tubbs II
> >>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if
> >>>> the features contained within are incomplete.
> >>>>
> >>>> There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that
> >>>> would
> all
> >>>>
> >>> fall
> >>>
> >>>> into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back
> >>>> out
> large
> >>>> changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug fixes"
> >>>> and
> >>>> not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new
> >>>> features
> >>>>
> >>> which
> >>>
> >>>> I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the
> >>>> guy
> who
> >>>> throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing
> >>>> the
> >>>>
> >>> quality
> >>>
> >>>> of our release.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time.
> I'll
> >>>>> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher
> >>>>> <ct...@apache.org>
> >>>>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-**1.6.0-issues<
> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy
> >>>>>> and ask for one :)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Christopher L Tubbs II
> >>>>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one
> >>>>>>> week
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> away.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>> If
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule,
> >>>>>>> please
> speak
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> up
> >>>
> >>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by John Vines <vi...@apache.org>.
I am concerned about the tickets around 118, as there seem to be a fair
amount of blockers revolving around it. What's the status of those?
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Encryption (rest+motion), Conditional Mutations, Root tablet in its own
> > table (instead of !METADATA), MiniAccumuloCluster improvements, Shell
> > improvements (jcommander related), lots of other bug-fixes/improvements
> and
> > updates to recent Hadoop versions.
> >
>
> Also ACCUMULO-118 and ACCUMULO-1451
>
>
> >
> > Those are what pop out at me.
> >
> >
> > On 10/25/13 12:49 PM, Sean Busbey wrote:
> >
> >> Does anyone know off the top of their head the feature(s) that caused
> 1.6
> >> to be planned as a major release in the first place?
> >>
> >> I see ~180 resolved issues in jira, but we don't appear to have a
> shortcut
> >> for flagging things as breaking.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I don't mind putting things off to 1.7 (if necessary). But... if 1.6.0
> >>> isn't sufficiently feature rich, there's not really a reason to
> >>> release it just yet... until those features are ready. That said, I do
> >>> think there'll be enough features in 1.6.0 to release it as a minor
> >>> release, if we're interpreting the version as the standard
> >>> <major>.<minor>.<bugfix> scheme, even if we end up pushing some stuff
> >>> off to 1.7.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Christopher L Tubbs II
> >>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if the
> >>>> features contained within are incomplete.
> >>>>
> >>>> There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that would
> all
> >>>>
> >>> fall
> >>>
> >>>> into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back out
> large
> >>>> changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug fixes"
> >>>> and
> >>>> not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new features
> >>>>
> >>> which
> >>>
> >>>> I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the guy
> who
> >>>> throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing the
> >>>>
> >>> quality
> >>>
> >>>> of our release.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time.
> I'll
> >>>>> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org>
> >>>>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-**1.6.0-issues<
> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
> >>>>>> ask for one :)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Christopher L Tubbs II
> >>>>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> away.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>> If
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please
> speak
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> up
> >>>
> >>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com>.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Encryption (rest+motion), Conditional Mutations, Root tablet in its own
> table (instead of !METADATA), MiniAccumuloCluster improvements, Shell
> improvements (jcommander related), lots of other bug-fixes/improvements and
> updates to recent Hadoop versions.
>
Also ACCUMULO-118 and ACCUMULO-1451
>
> Those are what pop out at me.
>
>
> On 10/25/13 12:49 PM, Sean Busbey wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know off the top of their head the feature(s) that caused 1.6
>> to be planned as a major release in the first place?
>>
>> I see ~180 resolved issues in jira, but we don't appear to have a shortcut
>> for flagging things as breaking.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> I don't mind putting things off to 1.7 (if necessary). But... if 1.6.0
>>> isn't sufficiently feature rich, there's not really a reason to
>>> release it just yet... until those features are ready. That said, I do
>>> think there'll be enough features in 1.6.0 to release it as a minor
>>> release, if we're interpreting the version as the standard
>>> <major>.<minor>.<bugfix> scheme, even if we end up pushing some stuff
>>> off to 1.7.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if the
>>>> features contained within are incomplete.
>>>>
>>>> There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that would all
>>>>
>>> fall
>>>
>>>> into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back out large
>>>> changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug fixes"
>>>> and
>>>> not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new features
>>>>
>>> which
>>>
>>>> I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
>>>>
>>>> I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the guy who
>>>> throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing the
>>>>
>>> quality
>>>
>>>> of our release.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time. I'll
>>>>> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org>
>>>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-**1.6.0-issues<http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
>>>>>> ask for one :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>>>>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> away.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> If
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please speak
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> up
>>>
>>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com>.
Encryption (rest+motion), Conditional Mutations, Root tablet in its own
table (instead of !METADATA), MiniAccumuloCluster improvements, Shell
improvements (jcommander related), lots of other bug-fixes/improvements
and updates to recent Hadoop versions.
Those are what pop out at me.
On 10/25/13 12:49 PM, Sean Busbey wrote:
> Does anyone know off the top of their head the feature(s) that caused 1.6
> to be planned as a major release in the first place?
>
> I see ~180 resolved issues in jira, but we don't appear to have a shortcut
> for flagging things as breaking.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I don't mind putting things off to 1.7 (if necessary). But... if 1.6.0
>> isn't sufficiently feature rich, there's not really a reason to
>> release it just yet... until those features are ready. That said, I do
>> think there'll be enough features in 1.6.0 to release it as a minor
>> release, if we're interpreting the version as the standard
>> <major>.<minor>.<bugfix> scheme, even if we end up pushing some stuff
>> off to 1.7.
>>
>> --
>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if the
>>> features contained within are incomplete.
>>>
>>> There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that would all
>> fall
>>> into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back out large
>>> changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug fixes" and
>>> not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new features
>> which
>>> I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
>>>
>>> I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the guy who
>>> throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing the
>> quality
>>> of our release.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time. I'll
>>>> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues
>>>>>
>>>>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
>>>>> ask for one :)
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>>>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week
>> away.
>>>>>
>>>>> If
>>>>>>
>>>>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please speak
>> up
>>>>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com>.
Does anyone know off the top of their head the feature(s) that caused 1.6
to be planned as a major release in the first place?
I see ~180 resolved issues in jira, but we don't appear to have a shortcut
for flagging things as breaking.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
> I don't mind putting things off to 1.7 (if necessary). But... if 1.6.0
> isn't sufficiently feature rich, there's not really a reason to
> release it just yet... until those features are ready. That said, I do
> think there'll be enough features in 1.6.0 to release it as a minor
> release, if we're interpreting the version as the standard
> <major>.<minor>.<bugfix> scheme, even if we end up pushing some stuff
> off to 1.7.
>
> --
> Christopher L Tubbs II
> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if the
> > features contained within are incomplete.
> >
> > There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that would all
> fall
> > into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back out large
> > changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug fixes" and
> > not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new features
> which
> > I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
> >
> > I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the guy who
> > throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing the
> quality
> > of our release.
> >
> >
> > On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
> >>
> >> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time. I'll
> >> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
> >>>
> >>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues
> >>>
> >>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
> >>> ask for one :)
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Christopher L Tubbs II
> >>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week
> away.
> >>>
> >>> If
> >>>>
> >>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please speak
> up
> >>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
--
Sean
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by Christopher <ct...@apache.org>.
I don't mind putting things off to 1.7 (if necessary). But... if 1.6.0
isn't sufficiently feature rich, there's not really a reason to
release it just yet... until those features are ready. That said, I do
think there'll be enough features in 1.6.0 to release it as a minor
release, if we're interpreting the version as the standard
<major>.<minor>.<bugfix> scheme, even if we end up pushing some stuff
off to 1.7.
--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if the
> features contained within are incomplete.
>
> There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that would all fall
> into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back out large
> changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug fixes" and
> not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new features which
> I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
>
> I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the guy who
> throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing the quality
> of our release.
>
>
> On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
>>
>> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time. I'll
>> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
>>>
>>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues
>>>
>>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
>>> ask for one :)
>>>
>>> --
>>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week away.
>>>
>>> If
>>>>
>>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please speak up
>>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com>.
True, but at the same time it makes no sense to release 1.6.0 if the
features contained within are incomplete.
There are still a number of blockers that are unresolved that would all
fall into the category of creating a broken 1.6.0 or having to back out
large changesets. I know these blockers would be categorized as "bug
fixes" and not "features", but some of these bugs are directly from new
features which I would argue are thus still a part of this feature.
I'm all for trying to release early and often, but I will be the guy who
throws a wrench in the works if we do it at the sake of reducing the
quality of our release.
On 10/25/13 11:49 AM, John Vines wrote:
> I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time. I'll
> gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
>>
>> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues
>>
>> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
>> ask for one :)
>>
>> --
>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week away.
>> If
>>> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please speak up
>>> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
>>
>
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by John Vines <vi...@apache.org>.
I'd rather not go down the slippery slope we went down last time. I'll
gladly be the bad guy and say that things are getting pushed to 1.7.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
> It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
>
> http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues
>
> Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
> ask for one :)
>
> --
> Christopher L Tubbs II
> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week away.
> If
> > anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please speak up
> > now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!
>
Re: Accumulo feature freeze in 1 week
Posted by Christopher <ct...@apache.org>.
It looks like we're 50% in terms of tickets complete.
http://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.6.0-issues
Extensions are always nice, but I'm not going to be the bad guy and
ask for one :)
--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
> Alright folks, we're down to the wire. Feature freeze is one week away. If
> anyone has any last minute concerns about this schedule, please speak up
> now. Otherwise, have a great weekend!