GitHub user ctubbsii opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/72
ACCUMULO-4145 Eliminate Text wrapping of tableIDs
* Best attempt to eliminate text wrapping of tableIDs on master branch.
* Some ByteBuffer wrapping still occurs due to thrift using bytes to
Github user ctubbsii closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/70
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
>
>
> A PMC governs a TLP. A TLP has >= 1 repository of code.
>
>
nifi has 3.
Thanks for the quick answers already, Christopher.
I don't necessarily want to say those were rhetorical questions, but I
was hoping to see a document put together which outlines these concerns
(I know Keith has a been a strong proponent against bit-rot in the past,
and assumed he's throught
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:37 PM Josh Elser wrote:
> I'd like to see some process put into place to mitigate "bit-rot". If
> the examples don't live in the "main" repository, how do we make sure
> they don't get ignored and become dead or "bad" code?
>
> For questions at the
Christopher wrote:
I also wonder what the ASF rule-of-thumb is for stuff like this... the
examples aren't really "projects" in the sense that they are moving towards
an official ASF "release", so much as they are code serving as runnable
documentation.
I do have the concern that every
Github user joshelser commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/71#issuecomment-185994820
> I was able to merge this PR into 1.7 with no conflicts and then merge the
result of 1.7+PR into master with no conflicts. If that is not the case, let me
know and
I don't know what it means to be a "formal subproject", but I'm +1 for
disconnecting the examples from our releases, and putting them in their own
repo to assist in making that happen.
I'm not sure what to do about wikisearch. It should probably go in there,
too, but what about its existing repo?
I'd like to see some process put into place to mitigate "bit-rot". If
the examples don't live in the "main" repository, how do we make sure
they don't get ignored and become dead or "bad" code?
For questions at the foreground now:
* Can we set up new CI jobs that build the new examples repo
I'd be +1 to making them an independent repo still controlled by the PMC.
Whether they need to be a formal subproject or not I think could go either
way.
--
Sean Busbey
On Feb 18, 2016 14:57, "Michael Wall" wrote:
> Talking with Keith and Christopher today, they mentioned it
Github user ctubbsii commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/71#discussion_r53393673
--- Diff:
core/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/core/util/shell/commands/OptUtil.java ---
@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ public static OptionGroup
Github user mjwall commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/71#issuecomment-185954621
Going to let this sit until tomorrow and then I will update the PR with
(exclusive).
I was able to merge this PR into 1.7 with no conflicts and then merge the
Github user mjwall commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/71#discussion_r53391009
--- Diff:
core/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/core/util/shell/commands/OptUtil.java ---
@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ public static OptionGroup
Talking with Keith and Christopher today, they mentioned it might be useful
to pull the examples out of Accumulo into a separate project with it's own
repo. Here are some talking points
- Provide an easy means to run examples against the MiniAccumuloCluster.
- Give users the ability to run
GitHub user mjwall opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/71
ACCUMULO-4138 Fix the description of -b options
It was wrong for FlushCommand and CompactCommand. In the process of
refactoring, the following was accomplished:
- Change the
15 matches
Mail list logo