(Where is Sean when we need him). I assume you've tried searching all the .pom files for a suitable entry to tweak?
-----Original Message----- From: Shannon Quinn [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Shannon Quinn Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 5:49 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [jira] Commented: (MAHOUT-537) Bring DistributedRowMatrix into compliance with Hadoop 0.20.2 I do have a backup plan, and I can certainly take that path from here. But just to sate my curiosity... :P how would I go about changing the Maven build to include a different version of Hadoop? I'll submit an updated patch (hopefully this weekend) with a more-hacky approach to bringing this up to 0.20.2. Shannon On 11/17/2010 6:49 PM, Jeff Eastman wrote: > I understand you just want to experiment, but I think it will be unlikely we > will switch to 0.21 given what has been reported about this release. Given > this situation, is it possible to stick with the current implementation until > the later releases improve? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Shannon Quinn [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Shannon > Quinn > Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 3:54 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [jira] Commented: (MAHOUT-537) Bring DistributedRowMatrix into > compliance with Hadoop 0.20.2 > > I wanted to keep the old code as a quick-and-dirty reference, but I will > delete on the next patch. Not sure when that will be, as we are nearing the > end of the semester... > > The unit tests that are failing should be the ones that depend on > DRM.times(), as well as any that invoke its constructor (which has changed). > Those should be fixed once I finish the conversion of times(). > > However, I still haven't figured out how to use a different version of Hadoop > in my build; Maven pulls version 0.20 in by default and I can't seem to find > where to modify this, and even if I could I don't know what I'd modify it to. > I understand there's a whole other discussion about whether or not a > different version of Hadoop is the answer, but I want to see if this works at > all first. If not, I have another (but slightly more hacky) approach I could > use. Anyone know how to do this? > > Shannon > > Apologies for the brevity, this was sent from my iPhone > > On Nov 16, 2010, at 23:42, "Jeff Eastman (JIRA)"<[email protected]> wrote: > >> [ >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT-537?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12932808#action_12932808 >> ] >> >> Jeff Eastman commented on MAHOUT-537: >> ------------------------------------- >> >> Tried out the patch. It applied cleanly and, after adding a throws >> declaration, compiles. It still has some commented out old code that could >> be removed but otherwise looks reasonable. You are making progress on a >> tough problem. This is still a WIP of course and a few unit tests are >> failing. It will be interesting to hear of your 0.21 experiments. >> >>> Bring DistributedRowMatrix into compliance with Hadoop 0.20.2 >>> ------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Key: MAHOUT-537 >>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT-537 >>> Project: Mahout >>> Issue Type: Improvement >>> Affects Versions: 0.4 >>> Reporter: Shannon Quinn >>> Assignee: Shannon Quinn >>> Attachments: MAHOUT-537.patch >>> >>> >>> Convert the current DistributedRowMatrix to use the newer Hadoop 0.20.2 >>> API, in particular eliminate dependence on the deprecated JobConf, using >>> instead the separate Job and Configuration objects. >> -- >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA. >> - >> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. >>
