Java6

[Jim Kellerman <ji...@powerset.com>]

Should hbase-0.3.0 just be hbase-0.2.0 compiled against hadoop-0.18 ?

Should the functionality targeted for hbase-0.3.0 be deferred until hbase-0.4.0 ?

We need to support hadoop-0.18, however hadoop is making major changes in 0.19 such as requiring Java6.

Should we:
- not support 0.17 at all and go to 0.18?
- build a release (0.3.0) that targets hadoop-0.18 but incorporates no new features or bug fixes?

hbase-0.2.0 has had a long development cycle and it needs to be released SOON!

We need a release of hbase that supports hadoop-0.18. Should we ditch the features planned for hbase-0.3 and make the only difference from 0.2 that it requires hadoop-0.18, and move new features to hbase-0.4 which will target hadoop-0.19?


---
Jim Kellerman, Senior Engineer; Powerset

RE: Java6

[Andrew Purtell <ap...@yahoo.com>]

Hi Jim,

Would it be possible for you release those patches as-is and have someone else carry them forward as necessary?

   - Andy

> From: Jim Kellerman <ji...@powerset.com>
> Subject: RE: Java6
> To: "hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <hb...@hadoop.apache.org>
> Date: Monday, August 4, 2008, 12:32 PM
[...]
> > - Let 0.3.0 run a short development cycle to add some
> > smallset of features and release it with 0.18.
> 
> At a minimum this should include 678, 698 and esp 728, all
> of which I have patches for once our hands are untied.



      

RE: Java6

[Jim Kellerman <ji...@powerset.com>]

See comments below:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: stack [mailto:stack@duboce.net]
> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 8:14 PM
> To: hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Java6
>
> Jim Kellerman wrote:
> > We need to support hadoop-0.18, however hadoop is making
> major changes in 0.19 such as requiring Java6.
> >
> > Should we:
> > - not support 0.17 at all and go to 0.18?
> >
> I think that there should be an hbase offering for every
> hadoop release.
>
> > - build a release (0.3.0) that targets hadoop-0.18 but
> incorporates no new features or bug fixes?
> >
> >
> Or I'd vote for the following option:
>
> - Let 0.3.0 run a short development cycle to add some small
> set of features and release it with 0.18.

At a minimum this should include 678, 698 and esp 728, all of which I have patches for once our hands are untied.

> Target 0.4.0 for hadoop 0.19.

Yes.

Re: Java6

[stack <st...@duboce.net>]

Jim Kellerman wrote:
> We need to support hadoop-0.18, however hadoop is making major changes in 0.19 such as requiring Java6.
>
> Should we:
> - not support 0.17 at all and go to 0.18?
>   
I think that there should be an hbase offering for every hadoop release.

> - build a release (0.3.0) that targets hadoop-0.18 but incorporates no new features or bug fixes?
>
>   
Or I'd vote for the following option:

- Let 0.3.0 run a short development cycle to add some small set of 
features and release it with 0.18.

Target 0.4.0 for hadoop 0.19.

St.Ack

Re: Java6

[Jean-Daniel Cryans <jd...@gmail.com>]

Jim,

When is 0.18.0 supposed to be released? If soon, +1 on not supporting 0.17.
If not, +1 on having a 0.3 branch that only targets 0.18.

J-D

On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 10:18 PM, Jim Kellerman <ji...@powerset.com> wrote:

> Should hbase-0.3.0 just be hbase-0.2.0 compiled against hadoop-0.18 ?
>
> Should the functionality targeted for hbase-0.3.0 be deferred until
> hbase-0.4.0 ?
>
> We need to support hadoop-0.18, however hadoop is making major changes in
> 0.19 such as requiring Java6.
>
> Should we:
> - not support 0.17 at all and go to 0.18?
> - build a release (0.3.0) that targets hadoop-0.18 but incorporates no new
> features or bug fixes?
>
> hbase-0.2.0 has had a long development cycle and it needs to be released
> SOON!
>
> We need a release of hbase that supports hadoop-0.18. Should we ditch the
> features planned for hbase-0.3 and make the only difference from 0.2 that it
> requires hadoop-0.18, and move new features to hbase-0.4 which will target
> hadoop-0.19?
>
>
> ---
> Jim Kellerman, Senior Engineer; Powerset
>