This is great James. Since this is conveniently on Github, maybe we use the issue tracker there? Interested parties can set a watch. Would you be willing to add 'apurtell' as a collaborator on the repo? I will fork and send over PRs of course, but you might want help?
> On Sep 14, 2015, at 6:21 AM, James Heather <james.heat...@mendeley.com> wrote: > > I've set up a repo at > > https://github.com/chiastic-security/phoenix-for-cloudera > > It is a fork of the vanilla Phoenix github mirror. I've created a branch > called "4.5-HBase-1.0-cdh5", which we can use for making a CDH5-compatible > version. I've not made any of the necessary changes so far. > > I chose that branch, by the way, because it's the latest release, and is > using the same version of HBase as CDH5.4. The master branch of the Phoenix > repo is building a snapshot of (the forthcoming) Phoenix 4.6, against HBase > 1.1... presumably there will also be a Phoenix 4.6 for HBase 1.0? > > I'm not certain of the best way to manage this. Perhaps we need a new mailing > list for those who want to help, to avoid cluttering this list up. > > James > >> On 13/09/15 02:54, Jean-Marc Spaggiari wrote: >> Exact. There is some some code change because of what has been back ported >> into CDH and what has not been. But overall, it should not be rocket >> science. Mostly method signatures... >> >> Let us know when the repo is available so we can help... >> >> Thanks, >> >> JM >> >> 2015-09-12 18:38 GMT-04:00 Krishna <research...@gmail.com>: >>> As explained here, there are some code changes too in addition to pom >>> related changes. >>> >>> http://stackoverflow.com/a/31934434/165130 >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Friday, September 11, 2015, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> Or once parameterized, add a default off profile that redefines them all >>>> in one shot after the builder activates the >>>> profile on the maven command line with -P ... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sep 11, 2015, at 7:05 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The group IDs and versions can be parameterized in the POM so they can be >>>>> overridden on the maven command line with -D. That would be easy and >>>>> something I think we could get committed without any controversy. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sep 11, 2015, at 6:53 AM, James Heather <james.heat...@mendeley.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Yes, my plan is to create a fork of the main repo, so that we can still >>>>>> merge new Phoenix code into the CDH-compatible version. >>>>>> >>>>>> Before that, I do wonder whether it's possible to suggest a few changes >>>>>> to the main repo that would allow for >>>>>> compiling a CDH-compatible version, without needing to maintain a >>>>>> separate repo. The bulk of the changes are to dependencies in the pom, >>>>>> which suggests that it could be done to accept a switch to mvn build. >>>>>> >>>>>> James >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 11/09/15 14:50, Andrew Purtell wrote: >>>>>>> The first step I think is a repo with code that compiles. Please >>>>>>> initialize it by forking github.com/apache/phoenix so we have common >>>>>>> ancestors. Once we have a clear idea (by diff) what is required we can >>>>>>> figure out if we can support compatibility in some way. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sep 9, 2015, at 11:00 PM, Krishna <research...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I can volunteer to spend some time on this. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> CDH artifacts are available in Maven repo but from reading other >>>>>>>> threads on CDH-Phoenix compatibilty, it looks like there are some code >>>>>>>> changes to be made in Phoenix to successfully compile against CDH. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Here are questions to address: >>>>>>>> 1) How to maintain CDH compatible Phoenix code base? >>>>>>>> 2) Is having a CDH compatible branch even an option? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Krishna >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Friday, August 28, 2015, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Yes I am interested. Assuming CDH artifacts are publicly available in >>>>>>>>> a Maven repo somewhere, which I believe is the case, perhaps we (the >>>>>>>>> Phoenix project/community) could set up a Jenkins job that builds >>>>>>>>> against them and makes the resulting build artifacts available. They >>>>>>>>> would never be an official release, just a best effort convenience. >>>>>>>>> Would that work? I think little must be done besides compile against >>>>>>>>> the CDH artifacts for binary compatibility. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> > On Aug 28, 2015, at 11:19 AM, James Heather >>>>>>>>> > <james.heat...@mendeley.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > Is anyone interested in helping with getting an up-to-date >>>>>>>>> > CDH5-compatible build of Phoenix up and running? >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > Cloudera has a build of Phoenix 4.3 >>>>>>>>> > (https://github.com/cloudera-labs/phoenix), but this is now two >>>>>>>>> > versions behind, and there seems little desire at Cloudera to keep >>>>>>>>> > it updated. >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > I imagine that by looking at the differences between vanilla 4.3 >>>>>>>>> > and cloudera labs 4.3, and with some guidance from this list, we >>>>>>>>> > could get a good idea of what would need to be modified in 4.5+ and >>>>>>>>> > keep a CDH5-compatible build up to date. >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > Yes? >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > James >
