+1 (non-binding) On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 8:01 AM Rakesh Radhakrishnan <rake...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1 > > Rakesh > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 12:29 AM Aaron Fabbri <ajfab...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 (binding) > > > > Thanks to the Ozone folks for their efforts at maintaining good > separation > > with HDFS and common. I took a lot of heat for the unpopular opinion that > > they should be separate, so I am glad the process has worked out well > for > > both codebases. It looks like my concerns were addressed and I appreciate > > it. It is cool to see the evolution here. > > > > Aaron > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 3:37 AM Steve Loughran > <ste...@cloudera.com.invalid > > > > > wrote: > > > > > in that case, > > > > > > +1 from me (binding) > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 4:33 PM Elek, Marton <e...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > one thing to consider here as you are giving up your ability to > make > > > > > changes in hadoop-* modules, including hadoop-common, and their > > > > > dependencies, in sync with your own code. That goes for filesystem > > > > contract > > > > > tests. > > > > > > > > > > are you happy with that? > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes. I think we can live with it. > > > > > > > > Fortunatelly the Hadoop parts which are used by Ozone (security + > rpc) > > > > are stable enough, we didn't need bigger changes until now (small > > > > patches are already included in 3.1/3.2). > > > > > > > > I think it's better to use released Hadoop bits in Ozone anyway, and > > > > worst (best?) case we can try to do more frequent patch releases from > > > > Hadoop (if required). > > > > > > > > > > > > m. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
