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

Switch to Threaded View
Accumulo >> mail # dev >> Re: [VOTE] JDK 1.7 - Switch for Accumulo 1.6.0


Copy link to this message
-
Re: [VOTE] JDK 1.7 - Switch for Accumulo 1.6.0
Agreed.

--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Josh Elser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That would have also been my assumption since it was not otherwise stated.
> However, given the nature of this vote, I believe non-binding votes should
> also be carefully considered.
>
>
> On 6/6/13 10:22 AM, Billie Rinaldi wrote:
>>
>> I would assume all our votes are "community welcome to vote, only
>> committers binding."
>>
>> Billie
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 6:52 AM, David Medinets
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>
>>> Who is voting - the accumulo community, the PMC members, or some other
>>> subset of people?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 11:51 PM, David Lyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> -1 Prefer to stay on java 1.6 until pulled by features or eol.
>>>>
>>>> -D...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:53 PM, German Gutierrez
>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>> I vote for in favor.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> German A. Gutierrez
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> All-
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please explicitly vote in favor or against changing the java
>>>>>> dependency to >=1.7.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Parsing vague "may cause..." or "might be..." concerns throughout the
>>>>>> text of the thread is tedious, and does not help me know what the
>>>>>> consensus of the group is, so we can move forward. If there's a
>>>>>> specific issue that is informing your vote, that's great, feel free
>>>
>>> to
>>>>>>
>>>>>> state it, but I don't want this issue to drag out for the duration of
>>>>>> the the Accumulo 1.6.0 development cycle because people are reluctant
>>>>>> to come to a concrete opinion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If it fails a vote, we'll revisit for Accumulo 1.7.0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm personally in favor of the change (+1), but it's not a big deal
>>>
>>> to
>>>>>>
>>>>>> me. I just want a concrete resolution.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>>>>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 10:51 AM, John Vines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have also heard mulling about issues with the way Kerberos
>>>>>>
>>>>>> authentication
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> behaves with JDK1.7 for hadoop. This may also have implications on
>>>>
>>>> the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Accumulo implementation as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:21 AM, Sean Busbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 10:37 PM, Ben Popp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> CDH4 claims JDK 1.6 and 1.7 support:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.cloudera.com/content/cloudera-content/cloudera-docs/CDH4/latest/CDH4-Requirements-and-Supported-Versions/cdhrsv_topic_3.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> CDH4 comes with some additional caveats about 1.7:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.cloudera.com/content/cloudera-content/cloudera-docs/CDH4/latest/CDH4-Release-Notes/cdh4rn_topic_2_2.html?scroll=concept_c1n_bln_tj_unique_1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The biggest one being the disclaimer about 1.7 compiled code.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Sean
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>