Done! Thanks for helping!
The branches in the repo mirror those in vanilla Phoenix. We shouldn't
push any changes to the vanilla branches, but only to "*-cdh5" branches
(or any temporary side branches we need to create).
The issue tracker will be very useful, yes.
James
On 14/09/15 17:22, Andrew Purtell wrote:
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
<mailto: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
<mailto: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
<http://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
