+1 on a BUILDING/README that explicitly documents build instructions. It's good for the release, and it's good for new contributors.
-1 on two poms, release-specific branch, etc. On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Enis Söztutar <[email protected]> wrote: > > It is two poms, right? Second one would be hbase-0.95.0-hadoop2? > > Two poms would just cause a mess, no? Can we do it the current way of the > hadoop.profile + the version specified by the command line. I was thinking > like a BUILDING.txt including > To build the release from the source, use: > > mvn package -Dhadoop.profile=2.0 -Dhadoop.version=2.0.3-alpha > -Dversion=0.95.0-hadoop2 > > If won't work, maybe we can do a branch, commit the changes to pom so that > hadoop2 is default, and release the artifacts from there? > Enis > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I do find the module dirs a bit distracting. Perhaps they could go into a > > -src.tgz ball only. But this is minor. What I meant by 'sane' is being > able > > to ./bin/hbase ... and get a viable process running. > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 4:52 AM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On 3/22/13, ramkrishna vasudevan <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:49 AM, Jimmy Xiang <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > >> As to hadoop, how about we ship two: one with hadoop1, the other > > with > > > > >> hadoop2? > > > > >> > > > > > I agree to this. Actually this will help a lot in case of > automatic > > > > > scripts that tries to use the tarball. If not every time the > source > > > has > > > > to > > > > > be recompiled with hadoop 2 and then need to create a tar ball and > > use > > > > it. > > > > > +1 on this. > > > > > > > > +1 here too > > > > > > > > I also like the idea of producing a single -bin tarball that unpacks > > > > into something sane. > > > > > > > > > > > > Whats 'sane' (smile). > > > > > > How about this: > > > > > > durruti:hbase-0.97-SNAPSHOT stack$ ls -la > > > total 688 > > > drwxr-xr-x 23 stack staff 782 Mar 22 20:39 . > > > drwxr-xr-x 15 stack staff 510 Mar 22 20:38 .. > > > -rw-r--r-- 1 stack staff 261312 Mar 18 09:27 CHANGES.txt > > > -rw-r--r-- 1 stack staff 11358 Mar 18 09:27 LICENSE.txt > > > -rw-r--r-- 1 stack staff 897 Mar 18 09:27 NOTICE.txt > > > -rw-r--r-- 1 stack staff 1377 Mar 18 09:27 README.txt > > > drwxr-xr-x 27 stack staff 918 Mar 18 09:27 bin > > > drwxr-xr-x 9 stack staff 306 Mar 20 22:37 conf > > > drwxr-xr-x 12 stack staff 408 Mar 22 15:27 dev-support > > > drwxr-xr-x 68 stack staff 2312 Mar 22 17:07 docs > > > drwxr-xr-x 4 stack staff 136 Mar 22 17:03 hbase-client > > > drwxr-xr-x 4 stack staff 136 Mar 22 17:03 hbase-common > > > drwxr-xr-x 6 stack staff 204 Mar 22 17:04 hbase-examples > > > drwxr-xr-x 4 stack staff 136 Mar 22 17:03 hbase-hadoop-compat > > > drwxr-xr-x 4 stack staff 136 Mar 22 17:03 hbase-hadoop1-compat > > > drwxr-xr-x 4 stack staff 136 Mar 22 17:04 hbase-it > > > drwxr-xr-x 4 stack staff 136 Mar 22 17:03 hbase-prefix-tree > > > drwxr-xr-x 4 stack staff 136 Mar 22 17:03 hbase-protocol > > > drwxr-xr-x 4 stack staff 136 Mar 22 17:03 hbase-server > > > drwxr-xr-x 7 stack staff 238 Mar 22 17:03 hbase-webapps > > > drwxr-xr-x 68 stack staff 2312 Mar 22 20:38 lib > > > -rw-r--r-- 1 stack staff 67265 Mar 22 15:25 pom.xml > > > drwxr-xr-x 6 stack staff 204 Mar 18 09:27 src > > > > > > > > > You can do ./bin/start-hbase.sh against this. The src is all there so > > you > > > can do 'mvn install' too. Docs are there also. > > > > > > Or do you find the hbase-* + src distracting? (The hbase-* has .java > > > flies, etc., in there). Should these be hidden, or better, off in a > > > -src.tgz ball? > > > > > > Thanks lads, > > > St.Ack > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > > > - Andy > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > > (via Tom White) > > >
