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

Switch to Threaded View
Hadoop, mail # dev - [VOTE] introduce Python as build-time and run-time dependency for Hadoop and throughout Hadoop stack


Copy link to this message
-
Re: [VOTE] introduce Python as build-time and run-time dependency for Hadoop and throughout Hadoop stack
Matt Foley 2012-11-30, 01:51
>> Python as runtime requirement. Are you planing to migrate all
BASH scripts provided by Hadoop (or dynamically created -ie launcher
scripts) to Python?

I don't intend to mandate use of Python.  Rather, I want there to be a
cross-platform option available.  Things that are best done in
platform-specific manner, should be done in shell for linux, and powershell
for windows.  But things that are best done in a platform-independent way,
can be, with a lower long-term maintenance cost than using different
scripts per platform.

This means that some, but not all, existing scripts may naturally migrate
to Python as the overall system is ported to Windows.  Hopefully when
someone is porting a script that can be well done in a platform-independent
way, they will be able to choose Python and write a single script that can
replace the shell script and make it unnecessary to maintain two scripts
(doing the same job but in different languages!) going forward.

>>  What else in the current build, besides saveVersion.sh, you see
as candidate to be migrated to Python?

I have a greatly improved version of src/docs/relnotes.py that I would like
to submit, for auto-gen of release notes.
That's all that I have on my hotlist right now, although I anticipate that
some of the shell scripts invoked by ant may be natural candidates.

>> How are you planning to define what Python modules can be used?
Will developers have to install them manually?

That's something the community will work out, the same way they decide what
library jars to include, and when to upgrade those versions.  But first,
let's get an agreement in principle that this is the direction we want to
go.

Cheers,
--Matt

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Matt, thanks for the clarification.
>
> I may have missed the main point of the PROPOSAL thread then. I personally
> want to continue the discussion before voting.
>
> * Phyton as runtime requirement. Are you planing to migrate all BASH
> scripts provided by Hadoop (or dynamically created -ie launcher scripts)
>  to Phyton?
> * What else in the current build, besides saveVersion.sh, you see as
> candidate to be migrated to Phyton?
> * How are you planning to define what Phyton modules can be used? Will
> developers have to install them manually?
>
> Cheers
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Matt Foley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Alejandro,
> > Please see in-line below.
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >  wrote:
> >
> > > Matt,
> > >
> > > The scope of this vote seems different from what was discussed in the
> > > PROPOSAL thread.
> > > In the PROPOSAL thread you indicated this was for Hadoop1 because it is
> > ANT
> > > based. And the main reason was to remove saveVersion.sh.
> > > Your #3  was not discussed in the proposal, was it?
> > >
> >
> > The item #3 was in my original statement of the problem, with which I
> > started the proposal thread.  In fact, the thread title was "[PROPOSAL]
> > introduce Python as build-time and run-time dependency for Hadoop and
> > throughout Hadoop stack".  It is true that only one or two people chose
> to
> > discuss #3 further in that thread.
> >
> > The point is not just to replace a single script, but to provide a means
> to
> > do cross-platform scripts, which will over time replace many
> > non-platform-specific scripts written in platform-specific languages.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > It seems this vote is dragging much more stuff it was originally
> > discussed.
> > > I think you should suspend the vote, recap the motivation and then
> > restart
> > > the vote.
> > >
> >
> > I respectfully disagree.  I believe a careful reading of the cited
> > discussion thread, plus my own statement of the vote, provides sufficient
> > background for a thoughtful decision on the subject.  Presumably so do
> the
> > ten other people who had already voted before you made that comment.
> >
> > If several other people want more discussion first, please speak up.