If you do decide you want to try this, you may want to try using the master branch (5.1.0-SNAPSHOT), and then help us drive to a 5.1.0 release.

I just pushed a change to the shading for the phoenix-server.jar earlier this week which should remove some headache due to conflicting versions of dependencies on the RegionServer classpath.

On 9/14/18 2:17 AM, Pedro Boado wrote:
Hi Curtis,

As far as I am aware nobody is working on it.

The approach I followed is, starting from master:
- Change parent pom to use cloudera dependencies instead of Apache's for
compilation
- Make it compile (relatively easy for 4.x)
- Make it pass tests (not that easy)
- Once it passed, wrote the parcel module.

There aren't a lot of code differences between cdh and base branches so I'd
try to follow the same approach - basing it on changes in the current
differences-.

I really think this effort is needed to try to bring both branches again as
close to each other as possible. Maybe some code differences are no longer
needed because CDH is already closer to the Apache version of Hadoop 3.0
and Hbase 2.0 than it was when I did the migration.

Hope it helps,
Pedro.

On 14 Sep 2018 04:57, "Curtis Howard" <curtis.james.how...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all,

Is there anyone working towards Phoenix 5.0 / Cloudera (CDH) 6.0
integration at this point?  I could not find any related JIRA for this
after a quick search, and wanted to check here first before adding one.

If I were to attempt this myself, is there a suggested approach?  I can see
from previous 4.x-cdh5.* branches supporting these releases that the
changes for PHOENIX-4372 (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4372
)
move the builds to CDH dependencies - for example:
https://github.com/apache/phoenix/commit/024f0f22a5929da6f095dc0025b8e899e2f0c47b

Would following the pattern of that commit (or attempting a cherry-pick)
onto the the v5.0.0-HBase-2.0 tagged release (
https://github.com/apache/phoenix/tree/v5.0.0-HBase-2.0) be a reasonable
starting point?

Thanks in advance

Curtis

Reply via email to