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

Switch to Plain View
Accumulo, mail # dev - Is C++ code still part of 1.5 release?


+
David Medinets 2013-05-13, 03:22
+
Christopher 2013-05-13, 03:45
+
Josh Elser 2013-05-13, 14:40
+
Christopher 2013-05-13, 15:08
+
David Medinets 2013-05-13, 21:29
+
Eric Newton 2013-05-14, 02:48
+
Adam Fuchs 2013-05-17, 14:26
+
Billie Rinaldi 2013-05-17, 14:49
+
Christopher 2013-05-17, 15:53
+
Adam Fuchs 2013-05-17, 18:04
+
Christopher 2013-05-17, 18:31
+
Keith Turner 2013-05-17, 18:46
+
Josh Elser 2013-05-17, 18:22
+
William Slacum 2013-05-17, 18:49
+
Adam Fuchs 2013-05-17, 19:11
+
John Vines 2013-05-17, 19:17
+
Josh Elser 2013-05-17, 19:35
+
John Vines 2013-05-17, 19:51
+
Michael Berman 2013-05-17, 20:00
+
Josh Elser 2013-05-17, 20:20
+
Adam Fuchs 2013-05-17, 21:12
+
Billie Rinaldi 2013-05-17, 21:39
+
Adam Fuchs 2013-05-18, 02:11
+
Christopher 2013-05-18, 02:39
+
Dave Marion 2013-05-17, 22:01
+
Christopher 2013-05-17, 21:53
+
Drew Pierce 2013-05-17, 21:42
+
Michael Allen 2013-05-17, 21:19
+
Christopher 2013-05-17, 21:39
+
Josh Elser 2013-05-17, 21:36
+
William Slacum 2013-05-17, 21:34
+
Billie Rinaldi 2013-05-17, 20:26
+
William Slacum 2013-05-17, 20:57
+
Corey Nolet 2013-05-17, 19:19
Copy link to this message
-
Re: Is C++ code still part of 1.5 release?
William Slacum 2013-05-17, 19:34
I don't think ease of work is a factor, since doing nothing is certainly
easier than something. I'd really just prefer consistency and convention in
what we do. If we label something as binary, it is binary. If we label
something as source, it is source. That's certainly a lower risk long term
strategy than, "it felt good at the time."
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Corey Nolet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Adam, I agree. As long as a user / system admin has a quick (and
> well-documented) path to getting the native map where it needs to go in the
> binary distribution, I think both 1 & 2 are viable. I tend to lean towards
> #1, for no reason other than that it adds 1 step but is much more
> maintainable.
>
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Adam Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Just to solidify the decision that Chris is already leaning towards, let
> me
> > try to clarify my position:
> > 1. The only reason not to add the native library source code in the
> > -bin.tar.gz distribution is that src != bin. There is no measurable
> > negative effect of putting the cpp files and Makefile into the
> -bin.tar.gz.
> > 2. At least one person wants the native library source code in the
> > -bin.tar.gz to make their life easier.
> >
> > This is a very simple decision. It really doesn't matter how easy it is
> to
> > include prebuilt native code in some other way or build the code and copy
> > it in using some other method. Those are all tangential arguments.
> >
> > Adam
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 2:49 PM, William Slacum <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I think of the native maps as an add on and they should probably be
> > treated
> > > as such. I think we should consider building a different package and
> > > installing them separately. Personally, for development and testing, I
> > > don't use them.
> > >
> > > Since we're building RPMs and debian packages, the steps to install an
> > add
> > > on is roughly 20 keystrokes.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Josh Elser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I believe I already voiced my opinion on this, but let me restate it
> > > since
> > > > the conversation is happening again.
> > > >
> > > > Bundling the native library built with a "common" library is easiest
> > and
> > > I
> > > > believe makes the most sense. My opinion is that source files should
> be
> > > > included in a source release and that a bin release doesn't include
> > > source
> > > > files. Since we're specifically making this distinction by making
> these
> > > > releases, it doesn't make sense to me why we would decide "oh, well
> in
> > > this
> > > > one case, the bin dist will actually have _some_ src files too."
> > > >
> > > > Is it not intuitive that if people need to rebuild something, that
> they
> > > > download a src dist (and bin) to start? :shrug:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 5/17/13 2:04 PM, Adam Fuchs wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Chris,
> > > >>
> > > >> I like the idea of including the most widely used library, but
> > empirical
> > > >> evidence tells me that roughly half of the users of Accumulo will
> > still
> > > >> need to compile/recompile to get native map support. There is no
> > reason
> > > >> not
> > > >> to make that as easy as possible by including the cpp code in the
> > > >> -bin.tar.gz -- at least I haven't heard a reason not to do that yet.
> > > >>
> > > >> Adam
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>  Adam, I didn't make any changes on this, because there were only a
> > few
> > > >>> opinions, and it didn't seem like there was a consensus. I can make
> > > >>> this change, though, if a consensus is established. It's very
> small,
> > > >>> and easy to do.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Billie, any of those options would work. I'm not sure we need to
> > > >>> recommend a particular one over the other, as long as users know
+
Christopher 2013-05-14, 00:43
+
Billie Rinaldi 2013-05-13, 14:21
+
Christopher 2013-05-13, 15:13
+
John Vines 2013-05-13, 15:34
+
Christopher 2013-05-13, 21:18
+
Josh Elser 2013-05-13, 23:37
+
Christopher 2013-05-14, 00:42
+
Christopher 2013-05-13, 03:46
+
David Medinets 2013-05-13, 12:26
+
Christopher 2013-05-13, 13:45