On 25 November 2014 at 00:58, Bernd Eckenfels <e...@zusammenkunft.net> wrote:
> Hello, > > Am Mon, 24 Nov 2014 16:16:00 -0800 > schrieb Colin McCabe <cmcc...@alumni.cmu.edu>: > > > Conceptually, I think it's important to support patches that modify > > multiple sub-projects. Otherwise refactoring things in common > > becomes a multi-step process. > > This might be rather philosophical (and I dont want to argue the need > to have the patch infrastructure work for the multi-project case), > howevere if a multi-project change cannot be applied in multiple steps > it is probably also not safe at runtime (unless the multiple projects > belong to a single instance/artifact). And then beeing forced to > commit/compile/test in multiple steps actually increases the > dependencies topology. > +1 for changes that span, say hadoop and hbase. but not for changes across hadoop-common and hdfs, or hadoop-common and yarn. changes that only span hdfs-and-yarn would be fairly doubtful too. there is a dependency graph in hadoop's own jars —and cross module (not cross project) changes do need to happen. -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and delete it from your system. Thank You.
