On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > I think I am still +1 to just creating one re-packaged .jar -- for now > at least. It fixes problems for sure. > And then I am happy for the cognoscenti to construct a better solution > later, and I'd be pleased to help. > Though I still don't find this re-packaging a bad thing -- theoretical > problems with signing keys and whatnot, yes, but don't exist in > practice now. > > I guess I'm asking whether anyone is for/against committing MAHOUT-691? >
I think for our examples job jar, this is a good idea, for now. I will try out your patch and see how it looks on my production cluster. -jake
