Doug,
The proposal:
1. Actions and tools should be separate classes, in separate files.
Wonderful! :-) That will make a set of things (e.g. run nutch in a container) very easy.
3. All actions must implement the following interface:
Inversion of control makes a lot of sense!
5. All plugins must implement NutchConfigurable.
What you mean with plugins? The plugin class? That is no problem and will not break the API.
In case you mean Extension implementation classes we have to port all plugin codes. :-/
Comments?
This changes makes a lot sense and I like them very much. I may have another improvement suggestion that can be done very easy.
Actually it is difficult to have tools using ndfs and local file system.
What do people think about introducing a ndfs notation in paths like it is used in protocol handlers? (ala http:// or file://)
I don't mean to write a protocoll hander for ndfs (this would be nice to have) but I just mean something like:
bin/nutch generate ndfs://namenode:8010/myNDFSFolder/mydb /mylocalsegment/
ndfs path: ndfs://namenode:8010/myNDFSFolder/mydb
local path: /mylocalsegment/
Advantages: less parameter needed by tools mixed file systems for tool
One day but this is out of scope now we can have classloading from ndfs, with such a syntax. :-)
Greetings, Stefan
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by Demarc: A global provider of Threat Management Solutions. Download our HomeAdmin security software for free today! http://www.demarc.com/Info/Sentarus/hamr30 _______________________________________________ Nutch-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nutch-developers
