It's also worthwhile to note, again, that you don't *need* that native
map to run Accumulo.
I agree with your point on the suffix. If we can't come to something
where everyone is happy, we don't make two distributions.
To give some 3rd party ASF context -- Apache Hadoop, in their bin
distribution, includes "no" source (which includes Java and C++). In
their src distribution, you get both the compiled binaries and the source.
Only caveat with that are some headers that I think you need to run
pipes, but that's irrelevant to this discussion.
On 5/17/13 4:00 PM, Michael Berman wrote:
As an Accumulo user, the thing I want most is a single package that
contains the things I need to set up a running instance. I don't want to
build the whole thing from source, but I am happy to build the native map,
unless every possible architecture is going to be distributed. I really
don't care at all whether the tarball name ends in "-bin" or "-package" or
"-theStuffYouWant". If the only reason not to include the native map
sources in the binary release is because the filename ends in -bin, why not
just call it accumulo-1.5.0.tar.gz?
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 3:51 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
If we're going to be making binary releases that have no other mechanism
for creating the native libraries, then we should probably cut a few
different binary releases for x86, amd64, and darwin at the very least.
Sent from my phone, please pardon the typos and brevity.
On May 17, 2013 12:36 PM, "Josh Elser" <josh.el...@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm happy we're stating our opinions here, but there are also two other
people who believe that the bin should not contain it. That's nice that
you
want source code in a binary release, but your opinion is not the only
one.
I feel like you're telling me that my opinion is sub-par to your opinion
because it is.
If this is such a sticking point, I move that we completely kill the
notion of source and binary releases and make one tarball that contains
both.
On 5/17/13 3:17 PM, John Vines wrote:
I agree with Adam. It seems like it's a debate of consistency vs.
pragmatism. The cost of including these libraries are all of maybe 1kb
in
the package. The cost of excluding them is potential frustration from
end
users and a lot of repetitive stress against the Apache Mirrors (lets
try
and be considerate). I think it's a no brainer, but I have yet to here a
reason that is not 'no source code in a binary release!'
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Adam Fuchs <afu...@apache.org> wrote:
Just to solidify the decision that Chris is already leaning towards,
let
me
try to clarify my position:
1. The only reason not to add the native library source code in the
-bin.tar.gz distribution is that src != bin. There is no measurable
negative effect of putting the cpp files and Makefile into the
-bin.tar.gz.
2. At least one person wants the native library source code in the
-bin.tar.gz to make their life easier.
This is a very simple decision. It really doesn't matter how easy it is
to
include prebuilt native code in some other way or build the code and
copy
it in using some other method. Those are all tangential arguments.
Adam
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 2:49 PM, William Slacum <
wilhelm.von.cl...@accumulo.net**> wrote:
I think of the native maps as an add on and they should probably be
treated
as such. I think we should consider building a different package and
installing them separately. Personally, for development and testing, I
don't use them.
Since we're building RPMs and debian packages, the steps to install an
add
on is roughly 20 keystrokes.
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Josh Elser <josh.el...@gmail.com>
wrote:
I believe I already voiced my opinion on this, but let me restate it
since
the conversation is happening again.
Bundling the native library built with a "common" library is easiest
and
I
believe makes the most sense. My opinion is that source files should
be
included in a source release and that a bin release doesn't include
source
files. Since we're specifically making this distinction by making
these
releases, it doesn't make sense to me why we would decide "oh, well
in
this
one case, the bin dist will actually have _some_ src files too."
Is it not intuitive that if people need to rebuild something, that
they
download a src dist (and bin) to start? :shrug:
