You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@sqoop.apache.org by Gwen Shapira <gs...@cloudera.com> on 2015/05/04 19:25:29 UTC
Sqoop 1.4.6 release lacking 0.20 artifacts
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
RE: Sqoop 1.4.6 release lacking 0.20 artifacts
Posted by "Xu, Qian A" <qi...@intel.com>.
Thank you.
-----Original Message-----
From: Abraham Elmahrek [mailto:abe@cloudera.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2015 2:46 AM
To: dev@sqoop.apache.org
Subject: Re: Sqoop 1.4.6 release lacking 0.20 artifacts
I've pushed the release artifacts to
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/sqoop/1.4.6/.
-Abe
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 12:55 AM, Abraham Elmahrek <ab...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> We have 3 +1s from PMC... I'm going to push the 1.4.6 release artifacts.
> Thanks Gwen for finding the issue and every one for jumping in!
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Abraham Elmahrek <ab...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
>> 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
>> <ja...@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" <ab...@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
>>> >> <gs...@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
>>> >>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Sqoop 1.4.6 release lacking 0.20 artifacts
Posted by Abraham Elmahrek <ab...@cloudera.com>.
I've pushed the release artifacts to
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/sqoop/1.4.6/.
-Abe
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 12:55 AM, Abraham Elmahrek <ab...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> We have 3 +1s from PMC... I'm going to push the 1.4.6 release artifacts.
> Thanks Gwen for finding the issue and every one for jumping in!
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Abraham Elmahrek <ab...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
>> 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 <ja...@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" <ab...@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 <gs...@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
>>> >>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Sqoop 1.4.6 release lacking 0.20 artifacts
Posted by Abraham Elmahrek <ab...@cloudera.com>.
We have 3 +1s from PMC... I'm going to push the 1.4.6 release artifacts.
Thanks Gwen for finding the issue and every one for jumping in!
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Abraham Elmahrek <ab...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> 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 <ja...@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" <ab...@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 <gs...@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
>> >>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Sqoop 1.4.6 release lacking 0.20 artifacts
Posted by Abraham Elmahrek <ab...@cloudera.com>.
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 <ja...@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" <ab...@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 <gs...@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
> >>>
>
>
Re: Sqoop 1.4.6 release lacking 0.20 artifacts
Posted by Jarek Jarcec Cecho <ja...@apache.org>.
+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 <vr...@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" <ab...@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 <gs...@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
>>>
Re: Sqoop 1.4.6 release lacking 0.20 artifacts
Posted by Venkat Ranganathan <vr...@hortonworks.com>.
+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" <ab...@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 <gs...@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
>>
Re: Sqoop 1.4.6 release lacking 0.20 artifacts
Posted by Abraham Elmahrek <ab...@cloudera.com>.
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 <gs...@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
>