So does this mean no contrib section?
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org> wrote:
> So far we've stayed with the process used by core as this minimizes the
> amount of work we need to do re process/build/release, etc... we just copy
> the process/build/release etc... used in core, we get all that for free. I'm
> hesitant to diverge as this will increase the amount of work we need to do.
> Core has moved to Ivy, we may move to that at some point, but currently
> we're focused on adding functionality, fixing bugs -- not changing build.
> Anthony Urso wrote:
>> Speaking of the contrib section, what is the status of ZOOKEEPER-103?
>> Is it ready to be reevaluated now that 3.0 is out?
>> On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Mahadev Konar <maha...@yahoo-inc.com>
>>> Hi Kevin,
>>> It would be great to have such high level interfaces. It could be
>>> something that you could contribute :) . We havent had the bandwidth to
>>> provide such interfaces for zookeeper. It would be great to have all such
>>> recipes as a part of contrib package of zookeeper.
>>> On 1/9/09 11:44 AM, "Kevin Burton" <bur...@spinn3r.com> wrote:
>>>> OK.... so it sounds from the group that there are still reasons to
>>>> rope in ZK to enable algorithms like leader election.
>>>> Couldn't ZK ship higher level interfaces for leader election, mutexes,
>>>> semapores, queues, barriers, etc instead of pushing this on developers?
>>>> Then the remaining APIs, configuration, event notification, and
>>>> can be used on a simpler, rope free API.
>>>> The rope is what's killing me now :)