Oops. Wrong group. I don't know definitively about hbase. I was spouting off about Mahout and hadn't noticed that your message wasn't like the previous 3 I had answered. A few months ago, there definitely was a problem with hbase, but I have no idea whether that is resolved.
Moving toward 3 as a policy is probably still a good thing. On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Doug Meil <[email protected]>wrote: > > Hey Ted, we were working on a ticket a few months ago and I was having > trouble because I was working with Maven 3 and you said it wasn't > supported (or didn't work well). > > If that's not the case anymore I'll update the book. > > > > On 10/9/11 4:31 PM, "Ted Dunning" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >The book is already slightly out of date. > > > >Maven 3 is better and handles almost all maven 2 builds pretty seamlessly. > > I don't see a problem with moving forward rather than back. > > > >On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Jesse Yates <[email protected]> > >wrote: > > > >> So the book says to use Maven 2, rather than Maven 3. Is it just that > >>the > >> docs are out of date or was there some discussion I'm missing? The only > >> thing I could find was that we should actually use maven 3 ( > >> http://search-hadoop.com/m/V9sBo1Kxzab1). > >> > >> I feel like Maven 3 is solid at this point (I've been building trunk > >>with > >> it > >> pretty consistently) and is pretty standard as far as industry usage. > >> > >> Should I just put in a Jira for updating docs? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Jesse Yates > >> > >
