---  +1 to patching where we need to ,

--- but also lets be explicit about what projects  we have the resources
to maintain patches for ? plz update
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ohjbkbLLP7NzOoZEyfhOkCmBSjUcOo8hmuFpkwbE4KM/
if you are commited to maintaining a particular feature in bigtop .


On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 12:42 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]> wrote:

> I think we need to go with the package-specific patching: seems most
> natural.
>
> Cos
>
> On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 09:06PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > What Jay said: bigtop doesn't really approve of patching source code
> releases
> > > from the Apache. However, make build system has a way to do this. And
> the
> > > question ultimately is "Shall we support patching in gradle build?"
> and if yes
> > > then "Shall it be better than the one we have in the make?"
> > >
> > > We just had this chat at the hackathon and I think we should go ahead
> and
> > > simply drop make build (as has been voted before). And if we need to
> have a
> > > patching in the gradle build - we'll add it later.
> >
> > Three points:
> >    * the current make way of doing things is a total hack and I don't
> > think it should live
> >    * it is true that Bigtop itself doesn't patch, but all the
> > commercial vendors using it
> >      do patch somehow. Now, I know that most of the time patches
> > coming from them
> >      reside in a dedicated branch and are not scattered around as
> > .patch files, so perhaps
> >      we don't need patching that much.
> >    * both DEB and RPM have native ways of adding patches to the source
> packages,
> >      perhaps the best way is to hook into that?
> >
> > What do y'all think?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
>



-- 
jay vyas

Reply via email to