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

Switch to Plain View
HDFS >> mail # dev >> VOTE: HDFS-347 merge


+
Colin McCabe 2013-02-17, 21:48
+
Andrew Purtell 2013-02-18, 02:35
+
Stack 2013-02-18, 01:49
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-18, 22:03
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 00:11
+
Patrick Angeles 2013-02-20, 18:08
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-20, 19:56
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-20, 23:01
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 23:06
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 23:06
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-20, 23:08
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 23:13
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-20, 23:31
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 23:40
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-21, 00:04
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-21, 00:12
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-21, 00:28
+
Chris Douglas 2013-02-21, 00:29
+
Aaron T. Myers 2013-02-21, 01:12
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-21, 15:40
+
Andrew Purtell 2013-02-21, 01:32
+
Chris Douglas 2013-02-21, 21:24
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-21, 22:15
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-22, 21:55
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-23, 02:32
+
Aaron T. Myers 2013-02-23, 02:40
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-24, 00:23
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-25, 18:24
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-25, 20:50
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-25, 21:16
+
Chris Douglas 2013-02-25, 21:50
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-26, 00:09
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-26, 00:39
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-26, 17:33
Copy link to this message
-
Re: VOTE: HDFS-347 merge
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Suresh Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> There's no reason to maintain multiple implementations of the same
>> feature, that's why per the 2246 jira it was proposed as a "good short
>> term solution till HDFS-347 is completed".   Why is ATM's compromise
>> unacceptable?
>>
>
> We have already discussed this.
>
> Here is the recap:
> HDFS-347 does not support all the platforms. HDFS-2246 does.
> So removing HDFS-2246 does not make sense unless HDFS-347
> supports all the platforms.
>
> I am not arguing we should retain HDFS-2246 forever. I do not currently
> have bandwidth to add HDFS-347 windows equivalent functionality.
> When I or someone else adds support for that we can discuss removing
> HDFS-2246. Until then I can support HDFS-2246 mechanism. I have
> also proposed how to make the current patch simpler where both the
> features can live together.
>
> I will change my vote to +1 in following two cases.
> 1. HDFS-347 supports all the other platforms HDFS-2246 supported and
>     hence truly becomes replacement.

I assume you mean in trunk?  Given that ATM's proposal is to only
remove HDFS-2246 from branch-2 once (a) we're confident in HDFS-347
and (b) adds Windows support, and we won't be releasing from trunk any
time soon -  from a user perspective - HDFS-2246 will only be replaced
with HDFS-347 until it supports Windows.  Ie ATM's compromise appears
to satisfy your requirement.
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-26, 19:35
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-26, 21:51
+
Chris Douglas 2013-02-27, 00:52
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-27, 01:09
+
Colin McCabe 2013-03-05, 20:24
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-03-05, 21:09
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-03-05, 23:08
+
sanjay Radia 2013-02-27, 19:45
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-27, 20:06
+
Colin McCabe 2013-02-27, 23:28
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-27, 23:42
+
Chris Douglas 2013-02-27, 23:29
+
Eli Collins 2013-02-25, 22:01
+
Colin McCabe 2013-02-25, 18:31
+
Colin McCabe 2013-02-22, 19:13
+
sanjay Radia 2013-02-27, 01:36
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-21, 00:47
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 20:16
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-20, 22:49
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 23:01
+
Suresh Srinivas 2013-02-20, 23:19
+
Tsz Wo Sze 2013-02-20, 21:48
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-20, 22:27
+
Bikas Saha 2013-02-26, 21:47
+
Todd Lipcon 2013-02-26, 22:07
+
Colin McCabe 2013-04-01, 23:32