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

Switch to Threaded View
Accumulo, mail # user - [VOTE] 1.5.0-RC2


Copy link to this message
-
Re: [VOTE] 1.5.0-RC2
Christopher 2013-05-13, 21:51
The base directory in both are accumulo-<version>.

--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Keith Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 11:15 PM, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Okay, so, personally, my favorite combination of options is:
>>
>> Drop the assemble portion if possible, keep "source-release" and
>> "binary-release" as the classifiers for maven, and rename the
>> filenames to "-src.tar.gz" and "-bin.tar.gz" when mirroring and
>
>
> This sounds great.  What will the dir names be when the tar files are
> extracted?
>
>>
>> publishing on the website (doesn't even require re-signing). This
>> keeps maven artifacts explicit, and follows conventions for download
>> links from the mirrors/website. While maven has a convention for
>> filenames, we don't have to be constrained by maven's filename
>> conventions when we publish on the website/mirrors.
>>
>> --
>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>
>>
>> On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Drew Farris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I don't want to change the source-release tarball name, because I
>> >> don't want to override the parent pom conventions for the *official*
>> >> source release. However, there may be more to be done with the
>> >> binary-release tarball... I'm just not sure what is the best option,
>> >> keeping in mind the factors of 1) consistency with prior releases, 2)
>> >> maven standards and conventions, 3) consistency between what is
>> >> published in Maven and what is published in the mirrors, and 4) not
>> >> holding up the release.
>> >
>> >
>> > Christopher, thanks for the detailed explanation.
>> >
>> > I believe I understand your goals regarding conventions (sticking to
>> > them),
>> > but something seems a little strange about the 'source-release' tarball
>> > name
>> > considering the Apache Maven project itself does not follow that
>> > convention
>> > for their artifacts (see: http://maven.apache.org/download.cgi) --
>> > neither
>> > do Hadoop, Lucene or HTTPd.
>> >
>> > That said, there appear to be a number of projects that >do< use
>> > source-release (https://www.google.com/search?q=source-release.tar.gz),
>> > so
>> > if it source-release.tar.gz is generally what's preferred over
>> > src.tar.gz,
>> > let's go with it.
>> >
>> > Point taken about dist vs. bin -- I'd seen dist used in previous versons
>> > of
>> > accumulo, but bin makes much more sense and seems to be a common
>> > convention.
>> > The second most common convention seems to be leaving the type off the
>> > tar.gz entirely, e.g: accumulo-1.5.0.tar.gz - according to google,
>> > binary-release.tar.gz seems to be used absolutely nowhere, so accumulo
>> > would
>> > be certainly a trailblazer in this territory if we followed that naming
>> > convention.
>> >
>> > Both of these facts aside, the oddest thing to me is the inclusion of
>> > 'assemble' in the artifact name. I understand why it is there and why it
>> > is
>> > necessary to assemble everything in a separate maven submodule, but
>> > changing
>> > this should be as simple as changing the finalName parameter in the
>> > assembly
>> > plugin configuration, shouldn't it? If we really must include something
>> > in
>> > the artifact name, consider the more meaningful term 'distribution'
>> > instead
>> > of 'assemble'? Then we wind up with something like:
>> > accumulo-distribution-1.5.0-source-release.tar.gz (which is pretty
>> > long-winded, isn't it?)
>> >
>> > So, preferring the terse, I'd vote for accumulo-1.5.0-src.tar.gz and
>> > accumulo-1.5.0.tar.gz or accumulo-1.5.0-bin.tar.gz
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>