lars hofhansl 2012-06-30, 16:22
Stack 2012-06-30, 16:39
lars hofhansl 2012-06-30, 16:45
Andrew Purtell 2012-06-30, 17:11
Jonathan Hsieh 2012-06-30, 20:47
lars hofhansl 2012-07-01, 00:24
Roman Shaposhnik 2012-07-01, 02:17
Andrew Purtell 2012-07-02, 00:29
Lars H 2012-07-02, 16:28
IIRC, we also shaded Guava in CDH3 into something like
On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Lars H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That is the best argument I heard so far. I'll commit the patch today.
> -- Lars
> Roman Shaposhnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> >On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 5:24 PM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> So will Guava 11.0.2 in hbase 0.94 be a problem? Should we not update
> Guava (at least not until 0.96)?
> >In general, I don't think there's good answer to how dependencies
> >are supposed to be managed wrt. version numbers. After all, all
> >of the Hadoop ecosystem projects have to deal with the fact that
> >there's at least half a dozen different branches of Hadoop they have
> >to work with. It is virtually guaranteed that whatever you do you will
> >end up incompatible with one of those builds and most likely the
> >version of a dependency that wins will be the one that Hadoop is using.
> >IOW, whatever is specified in the POM file of individual projects is
> >likely to be overridden anyway and the best the could be done
> >is to avoid known gaping incompatibility holes (of which I'm not
> >aware of too many).
Software Engineer, Cloudera