Corey Nolet 2013-04-26, 03:01
Christopher 2013-04-26, 11:27
Corey Nolet 2013-04-26, 14:18
Keith Turner 2013-04-26, 15:40
Christopher 2013-04-28, 05:45
Keith Turner 2013-04-29, 14:58
Christopher 2013-04-29, 16:27
Corey Nolet 2013-04-29, 17:00
Josh Elser 2013-04-29, 17:11
Keith Turner 2013-05-03, 16:04
I was wondering about that on a recent patch... I'd have done it in the
patch but i can't delete files...
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Keith Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems there was a consensus that MAC should be moved to server. Is
> anyone going to do this for 1.5?
> One more advantage of this move would be putting MAC in its one package.
> Currently it shares a package with a lot of unrelated test code.
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Josh Elser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think I like the idea of moving it to server and working towards MAC
> > the "regular" processes being equal citizens. Whether or not we make a
> > convenient option to auto-start a proxy is more of a discussion about how
> > easy we want to make startup for a new person.
> > As much as I think we need to get 1.5 out the door, I think this may be
> > best to nip right away rather than create confusion about "where did MAC
> > go!" immediately after 1.5.0 is released.
> > The server module seems like the most painless and correct home for
> > MiniAccumuloCluster.
> > On 4/28/13 1:45 AM, Christopher wrote:
> >> I agree that accumulo-test is the best place, but I think we should
> >> make it a point that no other modules should depend on accumulo-test
> >> for precisely this reason... to provide a place for end-to-end tests
> >> of other modules (the assembly module notwithstanding).
> >> This is actually a good reason to move MiniAccumuloCluster from test,
> >> because the proxy currently has a dependency on it just for
> >> MiniAccumuloCluster. That way, end-to-end integration testing that
> >> includes even testing of the proxy would make sense to exist in
> >> accumulo-test, and we'd avoid a circular dependency. It could be moved
> >> to server instead, as it seems to me that it is essentially an
> >> alternate server implementation (from the proxy's perspective,
> >> anyway). Though, I'm not sure I like the idea that the proxy is
> >> dependent on anything other than client code (accumulo-core).
> >> Alternatively, the proxy's dependency could be reversed, so that
> >> instead of the proxy having an option to start up a
> >> MiniAccumuloCluster, the MiniAccumuloCluster could have an option to
> >> start up the proxy. This reversal actually makes more sense to me
> >> anyway. I never understood why the proxy should have the option to
> >> start up Accumulo, Mini or otherwise, as the natural operation, as it
> >> seems to me to be a bit backwards: an interface launching the service,
> >> rather than a service exposing an interface. I suppose it's not
> >> unprecedented, but it seems backwards to me.
> >> A third option is to move MiniAccumuloCluster to another module
> >> entirely, but I'm not so sure that's necessary or desirable.
> >> Any of these options removes the circular dependency, if we're going
> >> to make the accumulo-test the place to put end-to-end integration
> >> tests.
> >> My preference is a combination of the first two options: to put
> >> MiniAccumuloCluster in the server module and reverse the dependency,
> >> so that proxy only depends on core, and none depend on test.
> >> --
> >> Christopher L Tubbs II
> >> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Keith Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Corey Nolet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> So the accumulo-test would be the best place to start putting end to
> >>>> integration tests?
> >>>> For test against code in modules that can not depend on
> accumulo-test I
> >>> think this is a good place.
> >>>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone
> >>>> -------- Original message --------
> >>>> From: Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>> Date: 04/26/2013 7:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
> >>>> To: Accumulo Dev List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>> Subject: Re: Integration Tests
Senior Software Engineer
Keith Turner 2013-05-03, 16:30
Corey Nolet 2013-05-03, 16:43
Corey Nolet 2013-04-28, 11:45
Michael Berman 2013-09-13, 21:15