You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hama.apache.org by "Edward J. Yoon" <ed...@apache.org> on 2012/01/03 00:51:34 UTC
Hadoop 1.0.0 and 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
Hi all,
When we release 0.4-incubating, should we use hadoop 1.0.0? and should
yarn module be included with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
--
Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
@eddieyoon
Re: Hadoop 1.0.0 and 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
Posted by Thomas Jungblut <th...@googlemail.com>.
Yes. Maybe we can just wait for 23.1. They seem to be nearly complete.
And then release a HAMA_YARN-0.1 or something like that.
2012/2/1 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
> I just noticed that there's a 'allowTimestampedSnapshots' in
> release-plugin.
>
> But, I prefer delay, it's more stable.
>
> What do you think about excluding yarn-version from 0.4.0-incubating
> release?
>
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Thomas Jungblut
> <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > You already heard it on commons-dev. There is nothin in the repository.
> > However, when slicing the release, you could download the real release
> and
> > manually put it into the lib folder.
> >
> > We can also wait with releasing YARN.. We should look at
> > HAMA-452<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAMA-452> first,
> > afterwards we can release it - in my opinion as ALPHA.
> >
> >
> > 2012/2/1 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
> >
> >> BTW, should we release yarn with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Thomas Jungblut
> >> <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Maybe we can just version-up simply until we reach version 1.0.
> >> >> And, I'd like to focus more on Hadoop 1.0 and release Hama 1.0 on top
> >> >> of Hadoop 1.0.
> >> >> AFAIK, 0.21 and 0.22 releases are unpopular. We may want to release
> >> >> just Hama 2.0 for Hadoop 2.0.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Yes, this sounds reasonable.
> >> >
> >> > 2012/1/31 Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>
> >> >
> >> >> +1
> >> >>
> >> >> And as Thomas mentioned that sticking to the stable release looks
> >> >> safer for us in maintenance.
> >> >>
> >> >> On 31 January 2012 11:13, Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >> >> > Maybe we can just version-up simply until we reach version 1.0.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > And, I'd like to focus more on Hadoop 1.0 and release Hama 1.0 on
> top
> >> >> > of Hadoop 1.0.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > AFAIK, 0.21 and 0.22 releases are unpopular. We may want to release
> >> >> > just Hama 2.0 for Hadoop 2.0.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Thomas Jungblut
> >> >> > <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> Yes. But I very much doubt that it works without any changes.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> There is
> >> >> >> - 20.2 (legacy stable) which we fully support with Hama 0.4.0.
> >> >> >> - 0.20.203, 0.20.204, 0.20.205 which should work with Hama 0.4.0
> as
> >> >> well.
> >> >> >> But we have to test this.
> >> >> >> - 21.0 I don't believe that anyone runs on this. However Hama may
> not
> >> >> run
> >> >> >> on this as well.
> >> >> >> - 22.0 and 1.0, I think both of them won't work.
> >> >> >> - 23.0 we have YARN.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> We'll see. From a critical point of view, we have two subreleases.
> >> >> Better
> >> >> >> would if we can somehow make Hama 0.4.1 work on 21 and 22.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> In my opinion we should always stick with the latest stable
> release,
> >> >> which
> >> >> >> is *0.20.203. *
> >> >> >> And the question is how they think they proceed with the
> releases. On
> >> >> the
> >> >> >> common roadmap I see 1.1.0 and 0.22.1, as well as 24.0.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> 2012/1/26 Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>> If there is not difference between 0.4.0 and 0.4.1, perhaps
> >> >> >>> maintaining 1 version (e.g. 0.4.0 + hadoop 1.0 or 0.4.0 + 0.20.2)
> >> >> >>> would be a bit easier for us.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> On 25 January 2012 17:15, Thomas Jungblut
> >> >> >>> <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>> > What if we ship different Hama versions with different Hadoop
> >> >> versions?
> >> >> >>> > let's say 0.4.0 ships with 20.2, 0.4.1 with Hadoop 1.0.
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > What should we do with yarn?
> >> >> >>> > I believe that we should just pack the jar, so people can try
> it
> >> out.
> >> >> >>> > We also should flag this as ALPHA, I don't believe my work is
> >> stable.
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > 2012/1/25 Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>:
> >> >> >>> >> +1
> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >>> >> 2012/1/25 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >>> >>> Let's release 0.4 incubating with hadoop 0.20.2 and switch
> the
> >> >> trunk
> >> >> >>> >>> to Hadoop 1.0 based.
> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Edward J. Yoon <
> >> >> edwardyoon@apache.org>
> >> >> >>> >>> wrote:
> >> >> >>> >>> > Hi all,
> >> >> >>> >>> >
> >> >> >>> >>> > When we release 0.4-incubating, should we use hadoop 1.0.0?
> >> and
> >> >> >>> should
> >> >> >>> >>> > yarn module be included with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
> >> >> >>> >>> >
> >> >> >>> >>> > --
> >> >> >>> >>> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> >> >> >>> >>> > @eddieyoon
> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >>> >>> --
> >> >> >>> >>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> >> >> >>> >>> @eddieyoon
> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > --
> >> >> >>> > Thomas Jungblut
> >> >> >>> > Berlin
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> Thomas Jungblut
> >> >> >> Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> >> >> > @eddieyoon
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Thomas Jungblut
> >> > Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> >> @eddieyoon
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Jungblut
> > Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> @eddieyoon
>
--
Thomas Jungblut
Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
Re: Hadoop 1.0.0 and 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
Posted by "Edward J. Yoon" <ed...@apache.org>.
I just noticed that there's a 'allowTimestampedSnapshots' in release-plugin.
But, I prefer delay, it's more stable.
What do you think about excluding yarn-version from 0.4.0-incubating release?
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Thomas Jungblut
<th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> You already heard it on commons-dev. There is nothin in the repository.
> However, when slicing the release, you could download the real release and
> manually put it into the lib folder.
>
> We can also wait with releasing YARN.. We should look at
> HAMA-452<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAMA-452> first,
> afterwards we can release it - in my opinion as ALPHA.
>
>
> 2012/2/1 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
>
>> BTW, should we release yarn with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Thomas Jungblut
>> <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Maybe we can just version-up simply until we reach version 1.0.
>> >> And, I'd like to focus more on Hadoop 1.0 and release Hama 1.0 on top
>> >> of Hadoop 1.0.
>> >> AFAIK, 0.21 and 0.22 releases are unpopular. We may want to release
>> >> just Hama 2.0 for Hadoop 2.0.
>> >
>> >
>> > Yes, this sounds reasonable.
>> >
>> > 2012/1/31 Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>
>> >
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >> And as Thomas mentioned that sticking to the stable release looks
>> >> safer for us in maintenance.
>> >>
>> >> On 31 January 2012 11:13, Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> > Maybe we can just version-up simply until we reach version 1.0.
>> >> >
>> >> > And, I'd like to focus more on Hadoop 1.0 and release Hama 1.0 on top
>> >> > of Hadoop 1.0.
>> >> >
>> >> > AFAIK, 0.21 and 0.22 releases are unpopular. We may want to release
>> >> > just Hama 2.0 for Hadoop 2.0.
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Thomas Jungblut
>> >> > <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> Yes. But I very much doubt that it works without any changes.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> There is
>> >> >> - 20.2 (legacy stable) which we fully support with Hama 0.4.0.
>> >> >> - 0.20.203, 0.20.204, 0.20.205 which should work with Hama 0.4.0 as
>> >> well.
>> >> >> But we have to test this.
>> >> >> - 21.0 I don't believe that anyone runs on this. However Hama may not
>> >> run
>> >> >> on this as well.
>> >> >> - 22.0 and 1.0, I think both of them won't work.
>> >> >> - 23.0 we have YARN.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> We'll see. From a critical point of view, we have two subreleases.
>> >> Better
>> >> >> would if we can somehow make Hama 0.4.1 work on 21 and 22.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In my opinion we should always stick with the latest stable release,
>> >> which
>> >> >> is *0.20.203. *
>> >> >> And the question is how they think they proceed with the releases. On
>> >> the
>> >> >> common roadmap I see 1.1.0 and 0.22.1, as well as 24.0.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2012/1/26 Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> If there is not difference between 0.4.0 and 0.4.1, perhaps
>> >> >>> maintaining 1 version (e.g. 0.4.0 + hadoop 1.0 or 0.4.0 + 0.20.2)
>> >> >>> would be a bit easier for us.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On 25 January 2012 17:15, Thomas Jungblut
>> >> >>> <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>> > What if we ship different Hama versions with different Hadoop
>> >> versions?
>> >> >>> > let's say 0.4.0 ships with 20.2, 0.4.1 with Hadoop 1.0.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > What should we do with yarn?
>> >> >>> > I believe that we should just pack the jar, so people can try it
>> out.
>> >> >>> > We also should flag this as ALPHA, I don't believe my work is
>> stable.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > 2012/1/25 Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>:
>> >> >>> >> +1
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> 2012/1/25 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >>> Let's release 0.4 incubating with hadoop 0.20.2 and switch the
>> >> trunk
>> >> >>> >>> to Hadoop 1.0 based.
>> >> >>> >>>
>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Edward J. Yoon <
>> >> edwardyoon@apache.org>
>> >> >>> >>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>> > Hi all,
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > When we release 0.4-incubating, should we use hadoop 1.0.0?
>> and
>> >> >>> should
>> >> >>> >>> > yarn module be included with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > --
>> >> >>> >>> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>> >> >>> >>> > @eddieyoon
>> >> >>> >>>
>> >> >>> >>>
>> >> >>> >>>
>> >> >>> >>> --
>> >> >>> >>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>> >> >>> >>> @eddieyoon
>> >> >>> >>>
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > --
>> >> >>> > Thomas Jungblut
>> >> >>> > Berlin
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Thomas Jungblut
>> >> >> Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>> >> > @eddieyoon
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Thomas Jungblut
>> > Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>> @eddieyoon
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Thomas Jungblut
> Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
--
Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
@eddieyoon
Re: Hadoop 1.0.0 and 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
Posted by Thomas Jungblut <th...@googlemail.com>.
You already heard it on commons-dev. There is nothin in the repository.
However, when slicing the release, you could download the real release and
manually put it into the lib folder.
We can also wait with releasing YARN.. We should look at
HAMA-452<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAMA-452> first,
afterwards we can release it - in my opinion as ALPHA.
2012/2/1 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
> BTW, should we release yarn with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Thomas Jungblut
> <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Maybe we can just version-up simply until we reach version 1.0.
> >> And, I'd like to focus more on Hadoop 1.0 and release Hama 1.0 on top
> >> of Hadoop 1.0.
> >> AFAIK, 0.21 and 0.22 releases are unpopular. We may want to release
> >> just Hama 2.0 for Hadoop 2.0.
> >
> >
> > Yes, this sounds reasonable.
> >
> > 2012/1/31 Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> And as Thomas mentioned that sticking to the stable release looks
> >> safer for us in maintenance.
> >>
> >> On 31 January 2012 11:13, Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> > Maybe we can just version-up simply until we reach version 1.0.
> >> >
> >> > And, I'd like to focus more on Hadoop 1.0 and release Hama 1.0 on top
> >> > of Hadoop 1.0.
> >> >
> >> > AFAIK, 0.21 and 0.22 releases are unpopular. We may want to release
> >> > just Hama 2.0 for Hadoop 2.0.
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Thomas Jungblut
> >> > <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> >> Yes. But I very much doubt that it works without any changes.
> >> >>
> >> >> There is
> >> >> - 20.2 (legacy stable) which we fully support with Hama 0.4.0.
> >> >> - 0.20.203, 0.20.204, 0.20.205 which should work with Hama 0.4.0 as
> >> well.
> >> >> But we have to test this.
> >> >> - 21.0 I don't believe that anyone runs on this. However Hama may not
> >> run
> >> >> on this as well.
> >> >> - 22.0 and 1.0, I think both of them won't work.
> >> >> - 23.0 we have YARN.
> >> >>
> >> >> We'll see. From a critical point of view, we have two subreleases.
> >> Better
> >> >> would if we can somehow make Hama 0.4.1 work on 21 and 22.
> >> >>
> >> >> In my opinion we should always stick with the latest stable release,
> >> which
> >> >> is *0.20.203. *
> >> >> And the question is how they think they proceed with the releases. On
> >> the
> >> >> common roadmap I see 1.1.0 and 0.22.1, as well as 24.0.
> >> >>
> >> >> 2012/1/26 Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>
> >> >>
> >> >>> If there is not difference between 0.4.0 and 0.4.1, perhaps
> >> >>> maintaining 1 version (e.g. 0.4.0 + hadoop 1.0 or 0.4.0 + 0.20.2)
> >> >>> would be a bit easier for us.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 25 January 2012 17:15, Thomas Jungblut
> >> >>> <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> > What if we ship different Hama versions with different Hadoop
> >> versions?
> >> >>> > let's say 0.4.0 ships with 20.2, 0.4.1 with Hadoop 1.0.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > What should we do with yarn?
> >> >>> > I believe that we should just pack the jar, so people can try it
> out.
> >> >>> > We also should flag this as ALPHA, I don't believe my work is
> stable.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > 2012/1/25 Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>:
> >> >>> >> +1
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> 2012/1/25 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>> Let's release 0.4 incubating with hadoop 0.20.2 and switch the
> >> trunk
> >> >>> >>> to Hadoop 1.0 based.
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Edward J. Yoon <
> >> edwardyoon@apache.org>
> >> >>> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >>> > Hi all,
> >> >>> >>> >
> >> >>> >>> > When we release 0.4-incubating, should we use hadoop 1.0.0?
> and
> >> >>> should
> >> >>> >>> > yarn module be included with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
> >> >>> >>> >
> >> >>> >>> > --
> >> >>> >>> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> >> >>> >>> > @eddieyoon
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>> >>> --
> >> >>> >>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> >> >>> >>> @eddieyoon
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > --
> >> >>> > Thomas Jungblut
> >> >>> > Berlin
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Thomas Jungblut
> >> >> Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> >> > @eddieyoon
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Jungblut
> > Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> @eddieyoon
>
--
Thomas Jungblut
Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
Re: Hadoop 1.0.0 and 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
Posted by "Edward J. Yoon" <ed...@apache.org>.
BTW, should we release yarn with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Thomas Jungblut
<th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Maybe we can just version-up simply until we reach version 1.0.
>> And, I'd like to focus more on Hadoop 1.0 and release Hama 1.0 on top
>> of Hadoop 1.0.
>> AFAIK, 0.21 and 0.22 releases are unpopular. We may want to release
>> just Hama 2.0 for Hadoop 2.0.
>
>
> Yes, this sounds reasonable.
>
> 2012/1/31 Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>
>
>> +1
>>
>> And as Thomas mentioned that sticking to the stable release looks
>> safer for us in maintenance.
>>
>> On 31 January 2012 11:13, Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > Maybe we can just version-up simply until we reach version 1.0.
>> >
>> > And, I'd like to focus more on Hadoop 1.0 and release Hama 1.0 on top
>> > of Hadoop 1.0.
>> >
>> > AFAIK, 0.21 and 0.22 releases are unpopular. We may want to release
>> > just Hama 2.0 for Hadoop 2.0.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Thomas Jungblut
>> > <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >> Yes. But I very much doubt that it works without any changes.
>> >>
>> >> There is
>> >> - 20.2 (legacy stable) which we fully support with Hama 0.4.0.
>> >> - 0.20.203, 0.20.204, 0.20.205 which should work with Hama 0.4.0 as
>> well.
>> >> But we have to test this.
>> >> - 21.0 I don't believe that anyone runs on this. However Hama may not
>> run
>> >> on this as well.
>> >> - 22.0 and 1.0, I think both of them won't work.
>> >> - 23.0 we have YARN.
>> >>
>> >> We'll see. From a critical point of view, we have two subreleases.
>> Better
>> >> would if we can somehow make Hama 0.4.1 work on 21 and 22.
>> >>
>> >> In my opinion we should always stick with the latest stable release,
>> which
>> >> is *0.20.203. *
>> >> And the question is how they think they proceed with the releases. On
>> the
>> >> common roadmap I see 1.1.0 and 0.22.1, as well as 24.0.
>> >>
>> >> 2012/1/26 Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>
>> >>
>> >>> If there is not difference between 0.4.0 and 0.4.1, perhaps
>> >>> maintaining 1 version (e.g. 0.4.0 + hadoop 1.0 or 0.4.0 + 0.20.2)
>> >>> would be a bit easier for us.
>> >>>
>> >>> On 25 January 2012 17:15, Thomas Jungblut
>> >>> <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >>> > What if we ship different Hama versions with different Hadoop
>> versions?
>> >>> > let's say 0.4.0 ships with 20.2, 0.4.1 with Hadoop 1.0.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > What should we do with yarn?
>> >>> > I believe that we should just pack the jar, so people can try it out.
>> >>> > We also should flag this as ALPHA, I don't believe my work is stable.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > 2012/1/25 Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>:
>> >>> >> +1
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> 2012/1/25 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> Let's release 0.4 incubating with hadoop 0.20.2 and switch the
>> trunk
>> >>> >>> to Hadoop 1.0 based.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Edward J. Yoon <
>> edwardyoon@apache.org>
>> >>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >>> > Hi all,
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > When we release 0.4-incubating, should we use hadoop 1.0.0? and
>> >>> should
>> >>> >>> > yarn module be included with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > --
>> >>> >>> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>> >>> >>> > @eddieyoon
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> --
>> >>> >>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>> >>> >>> @eddieyoon
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > --
>> >>> > Thomas Jungblut
>> >>> > Berlin
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Thomas Jungblut
>> >> Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>> > @eddieyoon
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Thomas Jungblut
> Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
--
Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
@eddieyoon
Re: Hadoop 1.0.0 and 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
Posted by Thomas Jungblut <th...@googlemail.com>.
>
> Maybe we can just version-up simply until we reach version 1.0.
> And, I'd like to focus more on Hadoop 1.0 and release Hama 1.0 on top
> of Hadoop 1.0.
> AFAIK, 0.21 and 0.22 releases are unpopular. We may want to release
> just Hama 2.0 for Hadoop 2.0.
Yes, this sounds reasonable.
2012/1/31 Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>
> +1
>
> And as Thomas mentioned that sticking to the stable release looks
> safer for us in maintenance.
>
> On 31 January 2012 11:13, Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Maybe we can just version-up simply until we reach version 1.0.
> >
> > And, I'd like to focus more on Hadoop 1.0 and release Hama 1.0 on top
> > of Hadoop 1.0.
> >
> > AFAIK, 0.21 and 0.22 releases are unpopular. We may want to release
> > just Hama 2.0 for Hadoop 2.0.
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Thomas Jungblut
> > <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> Yes. But I very much doubt that it works without any changes.
> >>
> >> There is
> >> - 20.2 (legacy stable) which we fully support with Hama 0.4.0.
> >> - 0.20.203, 0.20.204, 0.20.205 which should work with Hama 0.4.0 as
> well.
> >> But we have to test this.
> >> - 21.0 I don't believe that anyone runs on this. However Hama may not
> run
> >> on this as well.
> >> - 22.0 and 1.0, I think both of them won't work.
> >> - 23.0 we have YARN.
> >>
> >> We'll see. From a critical point of view, we have two subreleases.
> Better
> >> would if we can somehow make Hama 0.4.1 work on 21 and 22.
> >>
> >> In my opinion we should always stick with the latest stable release,
> which
> >> is *0.20.203. *
> >> And the question is how they think they proceed with the releases. On
> the
> >> common roadmap I see 1.1.0 and 0.22.1, as well as 24.0.
> >>
> >> 2012/1/26 Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>
> >>
> >>> If there is not difference between 0.4.0 and 0.4.1, perhaps
> >>> maintaining 1 version (e.g. 0.4.0 + hadoop 1.0 or 0.4.0 + 0.20.2)
> >>> would be a bit easier for us.
> >>>
> >>> On 25 January 2012 17:15, Thomas Jungblut
> >>> <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>> > What if we ship different Hama versions with different Hadoop
> versions?
> >>> > let's say 0.4.0 ships with 20.2, 0.4.1 with Hadoop 1.0.
> >>> >
> >>> > What should we do with yarn?
> >>> > I believe that we should just pack the jar, so people can try it out.
> >>> > We also should flag this as ALPHA, I don't believe my work is stable.
> >>> >
> >>> > 2012/1/25 Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>:
> >>> >> +1
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 2012/1/25 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>> Let's release 0.4 incubating with hadoop 0.20.2 and switch the
> trunk
> >>> >>> to Hadoop 1.0 based.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Edward J. Yoon <
> edwardyoon@apache.org>
> >>> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>> > Hi all,
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> > When we release 0.4-incubating, should we use hadoop 1.0.0? and
> >>> should
> >>> >>> > yarn module be included with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> > --
> >>> >>> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> >>> >>> > @eddieyoon
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> --
> >>> >>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> >>> >>> @eddieyoon
> >>> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > --
> >>> > Thomas Jungblut
> >>> > Berlin
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thomas Jungblut
> >> Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> > @eddieyoon
>
--
Thomas Jungblut
Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
Re: Hadoop 1.0.0 and 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
Posted by Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>.
+1
And as Thomas mentioned that sticking to the stable release looks
safer for us in maintenance.
On 31 January 2012 11:13, Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org> wrote:
> Maybe we can just version-up simply until we reach version 1.0.
>
> And, I'd like to focus more on Hadoop 1.0 and release Hama 1.0 on top
> of Hadoop 1.0.
>
> AFAIK, 0.21 and 0.22 releases are unpopular. We may want to release
> just Hama 2.0 for Hadoop 2.0.
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Thomas Jungblut
> <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Yes. But I very much doubt that it works without any changes.
>>
>> There is
>> - 20.2 (legacy stable) which we fully support with Hama 0.4.0.
>> - 0.20.203, 0.20.204, 0.20.205 which should work with Hama 0.4.0 as well.
>> But we have to test this.
>> - 21.0 I don't believe that anyone runs on this. However Hama may not run
>> on this as well.
>> - 22.0 and 1.0, I think both of them won't work.
>> - 23.0 we have YARN.
>>
>> We'll see. From a critical point of view, we have two subreleases. Better
>> would if we can somehow make Hama 0.4.1 work on 21 and 22.
>>
>> In my opinion we should always stick with the latest stable release, which
>> is *0.20.203. *
>> And the question is how they think they proceed with the releases. On the
>> common roadmap I see 1.1.0 and 0.22.1, as well as 24.0.
>>
>> 2012/1/26 Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>
>>
>>> If there is not difference between 0.4.0 and 0.4.1, perhaps
>>> maintaining 1 version (e.g. 0.4.0 + hadoop 1.0 or 0.4.0 + 0.20.2)
>>> would be a bit easier for us.
>>>
>>> On 25 January 2012 17:15, Thomas Jungblut
>>> <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> > What if we ship different Hama versions with different Hadoop versions?
>>> > let's say 0.4.0 ships with 20.2, 0.4.1 with Hadoop 1.0.
>>> >
>>> > What should we do with yarn?
>>> > I believe that we should just pack the jar, so people can try it out.
>>> > We also should flag this as ALPHA, I don't believe my work is stable.
>>> >
>>> > 2012/1/25 Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>:
>>> >> +1
>>> >>
>>> >> 2012/1/25 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
>>> >>
>>> >>> Let's release 0.4 incubating with hadoop 0.20.2 and switch the trunk
>>> >>> to Hadoop 1.0 based.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>> > Hi all,
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > When we release 0.4-incubating, should we use hadoop 1.0.0? and
>>> should
>>> >>> > yarn module be included with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > --
>>> >>> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>>> >>> > @eddieyoon
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>>> >>> @eddieyoon
>>> >>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Thomas Jungblut
>>> > Berlin
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thomas Jungblut
>> Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> @eddieyoon
Re: Hadoop 1.0.0 and 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
Posted by "Edward J. Yoon" <ed...@apache.org>.
Maybe we can just version-up simply until we reach version 1.0.
And, I'd like to focus more on Hadoop 1.0 and release Hama 1.0 on top
of Hadoop 1.0.
AFAIK, 0.21 and 0.22 releases are unpopular. We may want to release
just Hama 2.0 for Hadoop 2.0.
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Thomas Jungblut
<th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Yes. But I very much doubt that it works without any changes.
>
> There is
> - 20.2 (legacy stable) which we fully support with Hama 0.4.0.
> - 0.20.203, 0.20.204, 0.20.205 which should work with Hama 0.4.0 as well.
> But we have to test this.
> - 21.0 I don't believe that anyone runs on this. However Hama may not run
> on this as well.
> - 22.0 and 1.0, I think both of them won't work.
> - 23.0 we have YARN.
>
> We'll see. From a critical point of view, we have two subreleases. Better
> would if we can somehow make Hama 0.4.1 work on 21 and 22.
>
> In my opinion we should always stick with the latest stable release, which
> is *0.20.203. *
> And the question is how they think they proceed with the releases. On the
> common roadmap I see 1.1.0 and 0.22.1, as well as 24.0.
>
> 2012/1/26 Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>
>
>> If there is not difference between 0.4.0 and 0.4.1, perhaps
>> maintaining 1 version (e.g. 0.4.0 + hadoop 1.0 or 0.4.0 + 0.20.2)
>> would be a bit easier for us.
>>
>> On 25 January 2012 17:15, Thomas Jungblut
>> <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> > What if we ship different Hama versions with different Hadoop versions?
>> > let's say 0.4.0 ships with 20.2, 0.4.1 with Hadoop 1.0.
>> >
>> > What should we do with yarn?
>> > I believe that we should just pack the jar, so people can try it out.
>> > We also should flag this as ALPHA, I don't believe my work is stable.
>> >
>> > 2012/1/25 Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>:
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >> 2012/1/25 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
>> >>
>> >>> Let's release 0.4 incubating with hadoop 0.20.2 and switch the trunk
>> >>> to Hadoop 1.0 based.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > Hi all,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > When we release 0.4-incubating, should we use hadoop 1.0.0? and
>> should
>> >>> > yarn module be included with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > --
>> >>> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>> >>> > @eddieyoon
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>> >>> @eddieyoon
>> >>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Thomas Jungblut
>> > Berlin
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Thomas Jungblut
> Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
--
Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
@eddieyoon
Re: Hadoop 1.0.0 and 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
Posted by Thomas Jungblut <th...@googlemail.com>.
Yes. But I very much doubt that it works without any changes.
There is
- 20.2 (legacy stable) which we fully support with Hama 0.4.0.
- 0.20.203, 0.20.204, 0.20.205 which should work with Hama 0.4.0 as well.
But we have to test this.
- 21.0 I don't believe that anyone runs on this. However Hama may not run
on this as well.
- 22.0 and 1.0, I think both of them won't work.
- 23.0 we have YARN.
We'll see. From a critical point of view, we have two subreleases. Better
would if we can somehow make Hama 0.4.1 work on 21 and 22.
In my opinion we should always stick with the latest stable release, which
is *0.20.203. *
And the question is how they think they proceed with the releases. On the
common roadmap I see 1.1.0 and 0.22.1, as well as 24.0.
2012/1/26 Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>
> If there is not difference between 0.4.0 and 0.4.1, perhaps
> maintaining 1 version (e.g. 0.4.0 + hadoop 1.0 or 0.4.0 + 0.20.2)
> would be a bit easier for us.
>
> On 25 January 2012 17:15, Thomas Jungblut
> <th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > What if we ship different Hama versions with different Hadoop versions?
> > let's say 0.4.0 ships with 20.2, 0.4.1 with Hadoop 1.0.
> >
> > What should we do with yarn?
> > I believe that we should just pack the jar, so people can try it out.
> > We also should flag this as ALPHA, I don't believe my work is stable.
> >
> > 2012/1/25 Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>:
> >> +1
> >>
> >> 2012/1/25 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
> >>
> >>> Let's release 0.4 incubating with hadoop 0.20.2 and switch the trunk
> >>> to Hadoop 1.0 based.
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > Hi all,
> >>> >
> >>> > When we release 0.4-incubating, should we use hadoop 1.0.0? and
> should
> >>> > yarn module be included with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
> >>> >
> >>> > --
> >>> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> >>> > @eddieyoon
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> >>> @eddieyoon
> >>>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Jungblut
> > Berlin
>
--
Thomas Jungblut
Berlin <th...@gmail.com>
Re: Hadoop 1.0.0 and 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
Posted by Chia-Hung Lin <cl...@googlemail.com>.
If there is not difference between 0.4.0 and 0.4.1, perhaps
maintaining 1 version (e.g. 0.4.0 + hadoop 1.0 or 0.4.0 + 0.20.2)
would be a bit easier for us.
On 25 January 2012 17:15, Thomas Jungblut
<th...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> What if we ship different Hama versions with different Hadoop versions?
> let's say 0.4.0 ships with 20.2, 0.4.1 with Hadoop 1.0.
>
> What should we do with yarn?
> I believe that we should just pack the jar, so people can try it out.
> We also should flag this as ALPHA, I don't believe my work is stable.
>
> 2012/1/25 Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>:
>> +1
>>
>> 2012/1/25 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
>>
>>> Let's release 0.4 incubating with hadoop 0.20.2 and switch the trunk
>>> to Hadoop 1.0 based.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi all,
>>> >
>>> > When we release 0.4-incubating, should we use hadoop 1.0.0? and should
>>> > yarn module be included with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>>> > @eddieyoon
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>>> @eddieyoon
>>>
>
>
>
> --
> Thomas Jungblut
> Berlin
Re: Hadoop 1.0.0 and 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
Posted by Thomas Jungblut <th...@googlemail.com>.
What if we ship different Hama versions with different Hadoop versions?
let's say 0.4.0 ships with 20.2, 0.4.1 with Hadoop 1.0.
What should we do with yarn?
I believe that we should just pack the jar, so people can try it out.
We also should flag this as ALPHA, I don't believe my work is stable.
2012/1/25 Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>:
> +1
>
> 2012/1/25 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
>
>> Let's release 0.4 incubating with hadoop 0.20.2 and switch the trunk
>> to Hadoop 1.0 based.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > When we release 0.4-incubating, should we use hadoop 1.0.0? and should
>> > yarn module be included with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>> > @eddieyoon
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>> @eddieyoon
>>
--
Thomas Jungblut
Berlin
Re: Hadoop 1.0.0 and 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
Posted by Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>.
+1
2012/1/25 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
> Let's release 0.4 incubating with hadoop 0.20.2 and switch the trunk
> to Hadoop 1.0 based.
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > When we release 0.4-incubating, should we use hadoop 1.0.0? and should
> > yarn module be included with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> > @eddieyoon
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> @eddieyoon
>
Re: Hadoop 1.0.0 and 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
Posted by "Edward J. Yoon" <ed...@apache.org>.
Let's release 0.4 incubating with hadoop 0.20.2 and switch the trunk
to Hadoop 1.0 based.
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> When we release 0.4-incubating, should we use hadoop 1.0.0? and should
> yarn module be included with 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT?
>
> --
> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> @eddieyoon
--
Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
@eddieyoon