Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Accumulo >> mail # dev >> Releasing 1.5


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Releasing 1.5
Like what?

Are our hadoop1 and hadoop2 artifacts not binary compatible with those?

In any case, I think that's why it's important to offer a
source-release... we shouldn't be trying to build separate artifacts
for every possible 3rd party variant of Hadoop. So long as there's a
path forward for them to build from source, I think that should be
sufficient, shouldn't it?

--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 2:54 PM, John Vines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What about CDH3U5+ and CDH4? They also require some specialized packaging
> as well.
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> So, I have a process in place for releasing the tarballs, rpms, debs,
>> jars, PDFs, etc. using the maven-release-plugin, that signs and seals
>> everything and deploys to the staging repository for voting. I'm still
>> polishing it before I commit it.
>>
>> However, I've not figured out the best way to generate and release the
>> hadoop2 variants. They should be released with a classifier to
>> indicate they are for hadoop2, if they are released, but our build
>> isn't exactly set up to produce two artifacts per module, and neither
>> are our scripts capable of dealing with artifacts with classifiers in
>> them.
>>
>> My opinion is that we should release for Hadoop 1.0, but support
>> building from source against 2.0. Since 2.0 is still beta, this seems
>> acceptable to me, and we can try to do better support for packaging
>> for 2.0 in Accumulo 1.6.0, with tickets such as ACCUMULO-210 and the
>> like.
>>
>> --
>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 2:09 PM, Keith Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 2:03 PM, John Vines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Yes
>> >>
>> >
>> > Ok, I vaguely remember discussion of this on a ticket or in mailing list.
>> > Do you know the details?  Is this caused by something hadoop is doing, or
>> > is it how we are using Hadoop?  Can we change something in Accumulo to
>> > avoid this?
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Keith Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 1:48 PM, John Vines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Has anyone put any thought into how we're going to release 1.5,
>> >> > considering
>> >> > > the special cases needed for the various hadoop releases? I'm not
>> only
>> >> > > talking about distributions, but also the jars released to central.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > Does compiling against Hadoop 1 result in Accumulo class files that
>> will
>> >> > not work w/ Hadoop 2?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > > --
>> >> > > Cheers
>> >> > > ~John
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>>
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB