Chris Mattmann wrote:
Then, a user could take the /path/to/A/build/distribution folder, and then
copy it to a "deployment" directory, and then, that's the deployment of the
system, which is separate from source code, thereby untying the source
distribution and the deployment distribution. If we had this concept
currently in Nutch, I think a lot of the static Nutch conf issues dissapear,
correct, because we have the concept of separate deployments, instead of
just relying on the same deployment to run a whole bunch of distributed
processes out of.
I may be misunderstanding this whole conversation, but if I'm right, then I
would propose that we formalize a notion of a "deployment" of Nutch versus
the actual "source distribution", instead of co-mingling them. Thoughts?
I think it's a good concept in itself, i.e. it would be nice to have a
self-contained deployment package that you can simply copy around.
However, this does NOT by any means solve the problem of static
NutchConf, that problem is on the level of API usage and not the file level.
--
Best regards,
Andrzej Bialecki <><
___. ___ ___ ___ _ _ __________________________________
[__ || __|__/|__||\/| Information Retrieval, Semantic Web
___|||__|| \| || | Embedded Unix, System Integration
http://www.sigram.com Contact: info at sigram dot com
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
_______________________________________________
Nutch-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nutch-developers
