I like the idea of client tarball. I think it will make things easier for users. However, I agree with Keith that we are going to need to split the accumulo command into accumulo-client & accumulo-server. I am interested in helping out with this as I have done a lot of work on the scripts in 2.0.
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Josh Elser <josh.el...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > $dayjob presented me with a request to break up the current tarball into > two: one suitable for "users" and another for the Accumulo services. The > ultimate goal is to make upgrade scenarios a bit easier by having client > and server centric packaging. > > The "client" tarball would be something suitable for most users providing > the ability to do things like: > > * Launch a java app against Accumulo > * Launch a MapReduce job against Accumulo > * Launch the Accumulo shell > > Essentially, the client tarball is just a pared down version of our > "current" tarball and the server-tarball is likely equivalent to our > "current" tarball (given that we have little code which would be considered > client-only). > > Obviously, there are many ways to go about this. If there is buy-in from > other folks, adding some new assembly descriptors and making it a part of > the Maven build (perhaps, optionally generated) would be the easiest in > terms of maintenance. However, I don't want to push for that if it's just > going to be ignored by folks. I'll be creating something to support this > one way or another. > > Any thoughts/opinions? Would this have any value to other folks? > > - Josh >
