Yeah, I don't see the other thread either. Stuck in the outbox Casey? Jon
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017, 6:53 AM Otto Fowler <[email protected]> wrote: > What other thread? > > > On April 25, 2017 at 19:56:56, Casey Stella ([email protected]) wrote: > > Ok, I spun up that discussion in another thread. Hopefully we can get some > better sense about the various ways to spin up metron and a centralized > place to direct people to along with with guidance on when some approach > would be better than another. > > I'll be honest, I've totally lost track and never really consider anything > outside of full-dev anymore since it's the one that is generally stable > (quick-dev gets out of date quickly because mpack changes cause it to get > stale) and is sufficient for validating PRs. Most of the other ones tend > to either not have all of the system spun up (i.e. the hadoop components) > and therefore end up with me having to test in full-dev anyway or just > weren't apparent to me and have unknown pros and cons. ;) > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 7:21 PM, Casey Stella <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Yeah, I tend to agree that a rundown of the various methods and when you > > would use them is in order. I will say that full-dev is especially > > important to have working since it is required for validating PRs. > > > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 18:56 [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Can somebody map out all of the current methods and procedures to spin > up > >> Metron components? I swear I find out about new ones every month. > >> Metron-docker, the 4 vagrants, rpm-docker, ansible-docker, any others? > >> Perhaps an agreed upon write up of when to use what would be helpful. > >> > >> Jon > >> > >> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017, 6:17 PM Ryan Merriman <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> > A regression was introduced recently that breaks full dev. I've > >> narrowed > >> > down the commit that introduced it and have submitted a PR to revert > >> that > >> > commit: https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/549. > >> > > >> > Given there has been confusion recently over our deployment build > >> process, > >> > I think it's appropriate that we discuss and come to a consensus and > on > >> > how this should work. > >> > > >> > Ryan > >> > > >> -- > >> > >> Jon > >> > > > -- Jon
