Option #2 proposed by Amareshwari, seems like a better proposal. We don't want to repeat history for contrib again with hadoop-tools. Having a generic module like hadoop-tools increases the risk of accumulate dead code. It would be better to categorize the hdfs or mapreduce specific tools in their respected subcategories. It is also easier to manage from package/deployment prospective.
regards, Eric On Sep 6, 2011, at 4:32 PM, Eli Collins wrote: > On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Allen Wittenauer <a...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> On Sep 6, 2011, at 9:30 AM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli wrote: >>> We still need to answer Amareshwari's question (2) she asked some time back >>> about the automated code compilation and test execution of the tools module. >> >> >> >>>>> My #1 question is if tools is basically contrib reborn. If not, what >>>> makes >>>>> it different? >> >> >> I'm still waiting for this answer as well. >> >> Until such, I would be pretty much against a tools module. Changing >> the name of the dumping ground doesn't make it any less of a dumping ground. > > IMO if the tools module only gets stuff like distcp that's maintained > then it's not contrib, if it contains all the stuff from the current > MR contrib then tools is just a re-labeling of contrib. Given that > this proposal only covers moving distcp to tools it doesn't sound like > contrib to me. > > Thanks, > Eli
