I understand your reasoning Stack. However, this project is gathering a lot of
interest and is being considered in several (many?) places. Some noobs will find
bugs (???) and make embarrassing and very public keynotes at some major
conference. Some RD teams at companies considering HBase/Bigtable as appropriate
architecture might have insufficient confidence or be actually burned into
opting for something totally sub par but "stable" such as RDBMS sharding.
Perfection is not required, but a known issue affecting stability as according
to JGs analysis of the balancing issue, or which causes data loss as 1780 and
1784, must be fixed. I agree the rest can be pushed to a point release.

- Andy

________________________________ From: stack <sta...@duboce.net> To: hbas...@hadoop.apache.org Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 7:44:57 PM Subject: Re: ANN: hbase 0.20.0 Release Candidate 2 available for download

My reasoning is that RC2 has enough 'right' about it. Its radically better than our 0.19 offering, as is.

The benefit is that we have a week or two less of 0.19.x and that those who only work with released software will get the new hbase earlier.

I'm anxious to get us over this 0.20.0 hump -- yes, it will have known defects but every release we've made has had known defects? -- and to get the latest documentation up on our site so noobs and those whose only interaction with the project is via hbase.org -- the marjority? -- are using, finding bugs, and asking questions about the new rather than the old. I'd also like to get the 0.21 hbase focus started.

HBASE-1794 is amusing but for a fact, replay has been broken for many releases now. HBASE-1780 is a problem in 0.19.x HBASE-1784 is an issue, yeah, but looks like the hadoop install is missing hadoop-4681?

St.Ack