What I am referring to is metastore/ dir of hive, part of hive code which howl cares about most. Other howl code is for additional functionalities that Howl provides (none of which lives in metastore/ dir) they are in howl/ dir. There are few build file changes, but they are trivial.
Ashutosh On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 14:49, John Sichi <jsi...@fb.com> wrote: > But Howl does layer on some additional code, right? > > https://github.com/yahoo/howl/tree/howl/howl > > JVS > > On Feb 3, 2011, at 1:49 PM, Ashutosh Chauhan wrote: > >> There are none as of today. In the past, whenever we had to have >> changes, we do it in a separate branch in Howl and once those get >> committed to hive repo, we pull it over in our trunk and drop the >> branch. >> >> Ashutosh >> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 13:41, yongqiang he <heyongqiang...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I am interested in some numbers around the lines of code changes (or >>> files of changes) which are in Howl but not in Hive? >>> Can anyone give some information here? >>> >>> Thanks >>> Yongqiang >>> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Jeff Hammerbacher <ham...@cloudera.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Hey, >>>> >>>>> >>>>> If we do go ahead with pulling the metastore out of Hive, it might make >>>>> most sense for Howl to become its own TLP rather than a subproject. >>>> >>>> Yes, I did not read the proposal closely enough. I think an end state as a >>>> TLP makes more sense for Howl than as a Pig subproject. I'd really love to >>>> see Howl replace the metastore in Hive and it would be more natural to do >>>> so >>>> as a TLP than as a Pig subproject--especially since the current Howl >>>> repository is literally a fork of Hive. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> In the incubator proposal, we have mentioned these issues, but we've >>>>> attempted to avoid prejudicing any decision. Instead, we'd like to assess >>>>> the pros and cons (including effort required and impact expected) for both >>>>> approaches as part of the incubation process. >>>> >>>> Glad the issues are being considered. >>>> Later, >>>> Jeff >>> > >