Apache Ivy has also been looked at, I believe Hadoop Core is considering
Ivy for dependency management:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3305
http://ant.apache.org/ivy/
Patrick
Adam Rosien wrote:
If someone could deploy a build to a public maven repository it would
really help zk client development and adoption when integrating with
external maven-ized projects, since adding such a dependency is
trivial in maven.
.. Adam
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Patrick Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Hiram, afaik there is currently no interest (esp. among the contributors
I've talked with) to switch from ant to maven. For the time being we are
sticking with whatever Hadoop Core uses wrt build/release/etc... I know I've
personally (in my role as release manager) gained a lot of benefit by
"cloning" the Core process, scripts, documentation, etc...
Regards,
Patrick
Hiram Chirino wrote:
Anyone out there?
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Congrats on the release. Now that has been completed, I'd like to see
if you guys are willing to revisit the issue of a maven based build.
If yes, I'd be happy to assist making that happen.
Regards,
Hiram
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Patrick Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Our first official Apache release has shipped and I'm already looking
forward to 3.1.0. ;-)
In particular I believe we should look at the following for 3.1.0:
1) there are a number of issues that we're targeted to 3.1.0 during the
3.0.0 cycle. We need to review and address these.
2) system test. During 3.0.0 we made significant improvements to our
test
environment. However we still lack a large(r) scale system test
environment.
It would be great if we could simulate large scale use over 10s or 100s
of
machines (ensemble + clients). We need some sort of framework for this,
and
of course tests.
3) operations documentation. In general docs were greatly improved in
3.x
over 2.x. One area we are still lacking is operations docs for
design/management of a ZK cluster.
see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-160
4) JMX. Documentation needs to be written & the code reviewed/improved.
Moving to Java6 should (afaik) allow us to take advantage of improved
JMX
spec not available in 5. We should also consider making JMX the default
rather than optional (ie you get JMX by default when ZK server is
started).
We need to ensure that ops can monitor/admin ZK using JMX.
5) (begin) multi-tenancy support. A number of users have expressed
interest
in being able to deploy ZK as a service in a cloud. Multi-tenancy
support
would be a huge benefit (quota, qos, namespace partitioning of nodes,
billing, etc...)
Of course ZooKeeper is open to submissions in that aren't on this list.
If
you have any suggestions please feel free to enter a JIRA or submit a
patch.
Additionally I'd like to see us move to an 8 week release cycle. I've
updated the JIRA version list to reflect this. Due to the holiday season
approaching I've listed 3.1.0 with a ship date of Jan 19th. (see the
roadmap
on the JIRA).
If you have any questions/comments please reply to this email.
Patrick
--
Regards,
Hiram
Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
Open Source SOA
http://open.iona.com
