On Jan 14, 2011, at 11:53 AM, Tsz Wo (Nicholas), Sze wrote: > This is a kind of an incompatible change: all the developers, QAs, release > engineers and users have to change their local settings and scripts for this > change.
I have a hard time believing this as I suspect the very small set of folks that test/deploy post-project split releases (0.21/0.22/trunk) have been smashing the 3 projects back together for test/deploy purposes on a cluster. You *will* have to change your personal and your build machine SVN checkout urls, but beyond that, the projects remain as-is in separate trees. When we mavenize, that will perhaps cause the disruption you're mentioning, but that is a separate issue/discussion from this one. > Moreover, there are documentations, web pages and existing tools using > the Apache svn URLs. I sign up to correct the wiki, site, and Apache Hudson builds and build scripts (although help is gratefully received). > So it is a huge impact. I am conservative on this since, > as Konstantin mentioned, we risk to get into the same mess, and it will > create > more work for the community. I don't believe we have exited from the previous mess. This could actually help us do that faster. You may not have noticed that 0.21 was released as a single smashed together tar ball. 0.22 IMO is heading for the same kind of release. > Why do we want to enforce the releases as a unit, given that the long term > target is to release these 3 projects independently? Because that long term view is currently a fantasy with no real end in sight. Nige > ________________________________ > From: Nigel Daley <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Fri, January 14, 2011 11:21:25 AM > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Move project split down a level > > > On Jan 14, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Tsz Wo (Nicholas), Sze wrote: > >> Hi Nigel, >> >>> 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. >> >> Could you elaborate your idea on how the proposed changes would help? What >> the >> >> problems are being addressed? It is not clear to me. > > Critical in my mind was my statement: "We're a long way from releasing these > 3 > projects independently. Given that, they should be branched and released as > a > unit." This can not be enforced given the current svn layout. Other's can > weigh > in with additional thoughts. > >> You are right that the change is small but the impact is huge. We should >> first >> >> understand what we are getting from the changes before doing it. > > What do you see as the huge impact? > > Nige
