I think the main problem was that CDH4 is a non standard build. All others we tried worked with hadoop-1.2 and 2.2/2.4 builds.
But I understand your points. So, instead of creating those packages, we can make a guide "how to pick the right distribution", which points you to the hadoop-1.2 and 2.2/2.4 builds. For some cases, the guide will ask you to "compile-your-own". On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > Vendor X may be slightly against having two Flink-for-X distributions -- > their own and another on a site/project they may not control. > > Are all these builds really needed? meaning, does a generic Hadoop 2.x > build not work on some or most of these? I'd hope so. Might keep things > simpler for everyone. For example, are the "CDH5" and "HDP2.1" builds not > really just roughly "Hadoop 2.4" builds? If 2.4 needs its own profile so be > it, but it need not be so specific to a flavor. > > How about some simple steps to at least de-emphasize vendor builds? like a > separate page or pop-down panel? > > I can understand wanting to make it as simple as possible to access the > right build straight away, since these distros don't have Flink yet of > course. > > And hey, we make concessions in OSS to different versions of Java or Linux > vs Windows all the time. The bright line isn't clear. > > Perhaps: take steps to treat this more as a special case, and produce these > types of builds only where needed? where a non-trivial number of potential > users will have trouble consuming the project without a tweak, create a > special release on the side? > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Alan Gates <[email protected]> wrote: > > > My concern with this is it appears to put Apache in the business of > > picking the right Hadoop vendors. What about IBM, Pivotal, etc.? I get > > that the actual desire here is to make things easy for users, and that > the > > original three packages offered (Hadoop1, CDH4, Hadoop2) will cover 95% > of > > users. I like that. I just don't know how to do this and avoid the > > appearance of favoritism. > > > > Perhaps the next best step is to ask on incubator-general and see if > there > > is an Apache wide policy or if there needs to be one. > > > > Alan. > > > > Robert Metzger <[email protected]> > > August 18, 2014 at 6:54 > > Hi, > > > > I think we all agree that our project benefits from providing > pre-compiled > > binaries for different hadoop distributions. > > > > I've drafted an extension of the current download page, that I would > > suggest to use after the release: http://i.imgur.com/MucW2HD.png > > As you can see, users can directly pick the Flink version they want (its > > not going to show the CDH4 package there) or they can choose from the > table > > with the most popular (in my opinion) vendor distributions. > > The different links still point to the "hadoop1", "hadoop2" binaries, > but I > > don't think this is highlighting any hadoop vendors. > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 11:45 PM, Henry Saputra <[email protected] > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > Henry Saputra <[email protected]> > > August 15, 2014 at 14:45 > > Ah sorry Alan, did not see your reply to Owen. > > > > Mea culpa from me. > > > > - Henry > > > > > > > > Alan Gates <[email protected]> > > August 15, 2014 at 14:15 > > Sorry, apparently this was unclear, as others asked the same question. > > Flink hasn't had any Apache releases yet. I was referring to the > proposed > > release that Robert sent out, > > http://people.apache.org/~rmetzger/flink-0.6-incubating-rc7/ > > > > Alan. > > > > > > Sean Owen <[email protected]> > > August 15, 2014 at 11:26 > > PS, sorry for being dense, but I don't see vendor packages at > > http://flink.incubator.apache.org/downloads.html ? > > > > Is it this page? > > http://flink.incubator.apache.org/docs/0.6-SNAPSHOT/building.html > > > > That's more benign, just helping people rebuild for certain distros if > > desired. Can the example be generified to refer to a fictional "ACME > > Distribution"? But a note here and there about gotchas building for > > certain versions and combos seems reasonable. > > > > I also find this bit in the build script, although vendor-specific, is > > a small nice convenience for users: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-flink/blob/master/pom.xml#L195 > > Owen O'Malley <[email protected]> > > August 15, 2014 at 11:01 > > As a mentor, I agree that vendor specific packages aren't appropriate for > > the Apache site. (Disclosure: I work at Hortonworks.) Working with the > > vendors to make packages available is great, but they shouldn't be hosted > > at Apache. > > > > .. Owen > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Sent with Postbox <http://www.getpostbox.com> > > > > 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. > > >
