+1 on option 2. On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 10:56 AM, larry mccay <lmc...@apache.org> wrote:
> Interesting... > > As long as #2 provides full backward compatibility and the ability to > explicitly exclude the server dependencies that seems the best way to go. > That would get my non-binding +1. > :) > > Perhaps we could add another artifact called hadoop-thin-client that would > not be backward compatible at some point? > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Steve Loughran <ste...@hortonworks.com> > wrote: > > > just an FYI, the split off of hadoop hdfs into client and server is going > > to break things. > > > > I know that, as my code is broken; DFSConfigKeys off the path, > > HdfsConfiguration, the class I've been loading to force pickup of > > hdfs-site.xml -all missing. > > > > This is because hadoop-client POM now depends on hadoop-hdfs-client, not > > hadoop-hdfs, so the things I'm referencing are gone. I'm particularly sad > > about DfsConfigKeys, as everybody uses it as the one hard-coded resource > of > > HDFS constants, HDFS-6566 covering the issue of making this public, > > something that's been sitting around for a year. > > > > I'm fixing my build by explicitly adding a hadoop-hdfs dependency. > > > > Any application which used stuff which has now been declared server-side > > isn't going to compile any more, which does appear to break the > > compatibility guidelines we've adopted, specifically "The hadoop-client > > artifact (maven groupId:artifactId) stays compatible within a major > release" > > > > > > > http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/stable/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Compatibility.html#Build_artifacts > > > > > > We need to do one of > > > > 1. agree that this change, is considered acceptable according to policy, > > and mark it as incompatible in hdfs/CHANGES.TXT > > 2. Change the POMs to add both hdfs-client and -hdfs server in > > hadoop-client -with downstream users free to exclude the server code > > > > We unintentionally caused similar grief with the move of the s3n clients > > to hadoop-aws , HADOOP-11074 -something we should have picked up and > -1'd. > > This time we know the problems going to arise, so lets explicitly make a > > decision this time, and share it with our users. > > > > -steve > > >
