Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Pig >> mail # dev >> Where do we want to put non-java source files?


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Where do we want to put non-java source files?

On Mar 16, 2012, at 10:55 AM, Dmitriy Ryaboy wrote:

> You can put jruby into a maven-friendly location, though.

+1.

Alan.

>
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Jonathan Coveney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Sounds good. I'll just make that change as part of the jruby patch and
>> close the other one once it is in.
>>
>> 2012/3/16 Alan Gates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>>> I vote we avoid the re-organization until there's a tangible benefit.  I
>>> don't think there's any cost (beyond annoyance maybe) to putting ruby stuff
>>> in src-ruby.  There isn't any benefit to moving to
>>> src/main/java/maven/demands/super/long/paths until we move to maven, if we
>>> ever do.
>>>
>>> Alan.
>>>
>>> On Mar 15, 2012, at 7:03 PM, Daniel Dai wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is surely a desired directory structure, but I don't want to
>>>> spend too much time on that provides 0.10 release is approaching.
>>>> Currently the only impacted file is pigudf.rb. If someone can make the
>>>> change and do proper tests in several days, we can certainly change,
>>>> otherwise, we can just drop it to src/jruby.
>>>>
>>>> Daniel
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Dmitriy Ryaboy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> All patches will need to be regenerated.. yikes. But maybe worth it.
>>>>> Is that the structure maven expects? If we move stuff around, might as
>>>>> well make sure we won't need to redo it for maven if we ever get to
>>>>> that.
>>>>>
>>>>> D
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Thejas Nair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Sounds good to me.
>>>>>> My thoughts on the costs of this change -
>>>>>> - svn will still retain the history of the moved files. So that is not
>>> a
>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>> - build.xml would need some minor changes
>>>>>> - some extra steps will be required to apply the patches generated
>>> against
>>>>>> old directory structure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Thejas
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/15/12 5:54 PM, Bill Graham wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1 for src/main/ruby and src/main/java.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Jonathan
>>>>>>> Coveney<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So with the jruby addition (which I'm putting a cherry on top of as
>>> we
>>>>>>>> speak!), there's going to be some source files in ruby. Given that we
>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>> currently have (afaik) any code in languages other than java, there
>>> isn't
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> clear place to put this. The files are such that they can be
>>> packaged in
>>>>>>>> pig.jar and referenced via that (hooray for jruby), but we need a
>>> home
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The ideal would be src/main/ruby/, and move all the java to
>>>>>>>> src/main/java/,
>>>>>>>> but this seems like a pretty traumatic change at this point to
>>> accomodate
>>>>>>>> one file...even if we add some python and more ruby files, it doesn't
>>>>>>>> seem
>>>>>>>> worth killing old patches.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We could also do src-ruby in the base dir and just go from there?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>> Jon
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>