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

Switch to Threaded View
Accumulo >> mail # dev >> Is C++ code still part of 1.5 release?


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Is C++ code still part of 1.5 release?
Rumor has it that one of the core developers is irrationally hostile to
perl.

And octal.

And xml.

He's just old and cranky.

-Eric
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 5:29 PM, David Medinets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> How come perl is getting no love?
>
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Josh Elser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 5/12/13 11:45 PM, Christopher wrote:
> >
> >> 1) we don't need to include java bindings for the proxy; compiled
> >> versions are already in the proxy jar,
> >> 2) not all packagers will even have installed thrift with the ability
> >> to produce ruby and python bindings,
> >> 3) these may or may not be helpful to any particular end user (though
> >> it's probably safe to assume ruby and python will be the most common),
> >> 4) we're not including the proxy.thrift file, which is perhaps the
> >> most important file for the proxy, and including it should be
> >> sufficient.
> >>
> >>
> >>  1)That works. I should've caught that when I was in the proxy last and
> I
> > didn't.Thanks for that.
> > 2) Do you mean packagers as in people who might make an official release?
> > I would think these are the only people that "really" matter, and thus I
> > would expect them to be able to build a full distributionthat include
> these
> > bindings. It might be nice to be able to create a packaging for each
> > language (gem, egg, etc); but until we have some sort of packaging, I'd
> > really like to see theruby and pythonsources included even in the binary
> > dist.
> > 3)True, but I'd rather set the bar as low as possible for people who just
> > want to play around in a scripting language with Accumulo.
> > 4) Definitely want to make sure it's included.
> >
> > Does anyone have an opinion on other languages that thrift supports that
> > we should also create bindings for? I concur with your opinion on Ruby
> and
> > Python, but I wonder if there's something else that people would also
> like.
> >
>