That's likely going to be the outcome. However, I checked the build and it's failing on only one OS (SLES11) with an error we have become familiar with. BIGTOP-1400 fixed that same error earlier with Whirr.
Given that the fix might be something simple as bumping up the permGen to 512m, why don't we give that a shot first? If it's any more involved than that, I'd be personally be ok with dropping it. Mark On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > Pretty sure whirr is headed for the attic. > > > On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Jay Vyas <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > -For packaging of whirr... I don't see activity on it lately. Are bigtop > > folks using whirr? > > > > -for functionality of whirr, The bigtop-deploy/ recipes duplicate some > of > > whirrs functionality (we can add a vagrant-Ec2 recipe easily, I can help > ) > > > > > > > On Sep 4, 2014, at 11:23 PM, plinnell <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Cos mentioned in one of the jiras that whirr is failing to build and > > > perhaps we should drop it. When whirr came out it was useful to > > > orchestrate Hadoop into a cloud. > > > > > > Nowadays, there are a multitude of frameworks for deploying into > > > clouds. Moreover, they are much more mature recently. > > > > > > Drop whirr ? > > > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Peter > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) >
