I'd suggest putting hadoop-tools either at trunk/ level or having a a tools aggregator module for hdfs and other for common.
I personal would prefer at trunk/. Thanks. Alejandro On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Amareshwari Sri Ramadasu < amar...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote: > Agree. It should be separate maven module (and patch puts it as separate > maven module now). And top level for hadoop tools is nice to have, but it > becomes hard to maintain until patch automation tests run the tests under > tools. Currently we see many times the changes in HDFS effecting RAID tests > in MapReduce. So, I'm fine putting the tools under hadoop-mapreduce. > > I propose we can have something like the following: > > trunk/ > - hadoop-mapreduce > - hadoop-mr-client > - hadoop-yarn > - hadoop-tools > - hadoop-streaming > - hadoop-archives > - hadoop-distcp > > Thoughts? > > @Eli and @JD, we did not replace old legacy distcp because this is really a > complete rewrite and did not want to remove it until users are familiarized > with new one. > > On 8/26/11 12:51 AM, "Todd Lipcon" <t...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > Maybe a separate toplevel for hadoop-tools? Stuff like RAID could go > in there as well - ie tools that are downstream of MR and/or HDFS. > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Mahadev Konar <maha...@hortonworks.com> > wrote: > > +1 for a seperate module in hadoop-mapreduce-project. I think > > hadoop-mapreduce-client might not be right place for it. We might have > > to pick a new maven module under hadoop-mapreduce-project that could > > host streaming/distcp/hadoop archives. > > > > thanks > > mahadev > > > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Alejandro Abdelnur <t...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > >> Agree, it should be a separate maven module. > >> > >> And it should be under hadoop-mapreduce-client, right? > >> > >> And now that we are in the topic, the same should go for streaming, no? > >> > >> Thanks. > >> > >> Alejandro > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Todd Lipcon <t...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > >> > >>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Eli Collins <e...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > >>> > Nice work! I definitely think this should go in 23 and 20x. > >>> > > >>> > Agree with JD that it should be in the core code, not contrib. If > >>> > it's going to be maintained then we should put it in the core code. > >>> > >>> Now that we're all mavenized, though, a separate maven module and > >>> artifact does make sense IMO - ie "hadoop jar > >>> hadoop-distcp-0.23.0-SNAPSHOT" rather than "hadoop distcp" > >>> > >>> -Todd > >>> -- > >>> Todd Lipcon > >>> Software Engineer, Cloudera > >>> > >> > > > > > > -- > Todd Lipcon > Software Engineer, Cloudera > >
