Cool --- E14 - via iPhone
On Jan 14, 2011, at 10:01 AM, "Nigel Daley" <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the offer Eric! I agree it's the right time to mavenize, but I > think we should separate, but order, these two discussions/events. This > first, then mavenization. > > Cheers, > Nige > > On Jan 14, 2011, at 9:32 AM, Eric Baldeschwieler wrote: > >> I'm a huge supporter of the idea. On a related note, we've been looking for >> the right time to mavenize. Maybe we can do both together. We could pitch in >> a bunch of work on both if we could get the timing right. >> >> We've got a huge batch of commits in flight now, but if we can find >> something that satisfied the 22 crowd after we sync in, we'd be happy to >> pitch in on unsplit and/or maven. >> >> --- >> E14 - via iPhone >> >> On Jan 14, 2011, at 5:43 AM, "Ian Holsman" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> on that note... I propose we discuss un-splitting the project altogether. >>> >>> On Jan 14, 2011, at 3:39 AM, Jakob Homan wrote: >>> >>>> +1. The project split is a lie. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 12:32 AM, Ian Holsman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> +1 full agreement. >>>>> >>>>> I think it will be a pita admin wise (due to how svn authorization is set >>>>> up), so it might slow down creation of a new branch, but its worth it. >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> Ian Holsman >>>>> AOL Inc >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> (703) 879-3128 / AIM:ianholsman >>>>> >>>>> it's just a technicality >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 14, 2011, at 2:25 AM, Eric Baldeschwieler <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1 >>>>>> >>>>>> Death to the project split! Or short of that, anything to tame it. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 13, 2011, at 10:18 PM, Nigel Daley wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Folks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As I look more at the impact of the common/MR/HDFS project split on >>>>>>> what and how we release Hadoop, I feel like the split needs an >>>>>>> adjustment. Many folks I've talked to agree that the project split has >>>>>>> caused us a splitting headache. I think 1 relatively small change >>>>>>> could alleviate some of that. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> CURRENT SVN REPO: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> hadoop / [common, mapreduce, hdfs] / trunk >>>>>>> hadoop / [common, mapreduce, hdfs] / branches >>>>>>> >>>>>>> PROPOSAL: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> hadoop / trunk / [common, mapreduce, hdfs] >>>>>>> hadoop / branches / [common, mapreduce, hdfs] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We're a long way from releasing these 3 projects independently. Given >>>>>>> that, they should be branched and released as a unit. This SVN >>>>>>> structure enforces that and provides a more natural place to keep a top >>>>>>> level build and pkg scripts that operate across all 3 projects. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> Nige >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >
