I'd prefer not to make any changes to our existing tarball structure for the sake of packaging.
I've always believed that packaging should be done external from a project - this is the successful model used by 99.9% of all packaged Linux software. Shuffling around our tarball layout for the sake of packagers is not maintainable, as packages on different OSes/distributions may have different requirements. -Todd On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Eric Yang <[email protected]> wrote: >> For improving installation experience for HBase 0.92 with Hadoop 0.20.205, >> I wish we could get these patches >> into 0.92.0 RC: >> >> HBASE-4415 Add configuration script for setup HBase (hbase-setup-conf.sh) >> HBASE-4523 dfs.support.append config should be present in the hadoop >> configs, we should remove them from hbase so the user is not confused when >> they see the config in 2 places >> HBASE-4535 hbase-env.sh in hbase rpm does not set HBASE_CONF_DIR >> HBASE-4635 Remove dependency of java for rpm/deb packaging >> HBASE-4498 HBase RPM/DEB packages attempt to setup ZooKeeper environment >> incorrectly >> >> Patches are available for all jiras and reviewed. >> > > These patches look innocuous enough. If they all go in, what will we > have? A script that can install and configure an hbase? We'll have a > new /share dir in our tar ball when its undone. What else will they > give us? > > Thanks Eric, > St.Ack > -- Todd Lipcon Software Engineer, Cloudera
