And my apologies for duplicating half my draft :)
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 9:06 PM, Sean Mackrory <mackror...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> To start with I don't even understand what it means 'make version X a >>> default' > > I think what they/we mean is which one gets to be called just "sqoop" > in the directories and command names, and which one has its version as > a suffix (e.g. "sqoop1", "sqoop2"). Alternatively they could both have > the suffix. I don't feel that strongly any particular way, just > clarifying what I think is meant. > > command is just called "sqoop", and which one has its version as a > suffix (i.e. "sqoop1", sqoop2"). Alternately they could both have the > suffix. I don't feel that strongly any particular way, just clarifying > what I think is meant. > > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> To start with I don't even understand what it means 'make version X a >> default'. All components including into BOM are equal, except for Hadoop that >> is more equal than others ;) >> >> At any rate: bleeding edge mantra is just what we like to present Bigtop, it >> isn't really a policy of the project. Besides, Bigtop 0.6.0 was used as a >> stabilization of the stack based on Hadoop 2.0.x, namely 2.0.5 >> >> Another alternative to having Sqoop 1.x returned is too quickly bake 0.6.1 >> (along with Bruno's original idea), but with a single change in its BOM, ie >> Sqoop 1.x added into it. >> The scope of the release would be really limited, e.g. just one JIRA, and we >> should be able to get it out in a matter of a couple of days without >> disrupting 0.7.0. If this seems like a good way to go - let's separate these >> two and keep pn 0.7.0 discussion. >> >> Thoughts, >> Cos >> >> On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 05:19PM, Mark Grover wrote: >> > I am inclined against making Sqoop1 the default version in Bigtop precisely >> > because of the point Andrew raised. Moreover, we had some good reasons when >> > we moved to Sqoop2 that resonated with Bigtop's charter of a cutting edge >> > distribution and helping in the stabilization of Hadoop ecosystem projects. >> > More details at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BIGTOP-805 >> > >> > As far as adding back Sqoop1 back to Bigtop is concerned, this is a >> > community led project, so if the community wants it, it will happen:-) The >> > general sentiment when introducing Sqoop2 was that there wasn't a need for >> > having 2 versions of Sqoop. From poking around, I think we did the same for >> > Flume when migrating from Flume OG to Flume NG ( >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BIGTOP-323). >> > >> > As far as Sqoop2 being preview releases, one could argue that the Hadoop >> > releases bigtop bundles are preview as well. In my personal opinion, the >> > charter of Bigtop, is to be that very cutting edge well tested distribution >> > that helps in stabilizing them along the way. Personally, I feel like >> > Sqoop2 being default falls in line with that. Given the above, I would >> > personally vote for Sqoop2 being present in BOM. And, adding Sqoop1 back in >> > as non-default Sqoop if there is traction in the community. >> > >> > I am open to feedback, though. What do others think? >> > >> > Mark >> > >> > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Venkat Ranganathan < >> > vranganat...@hortonworks.com> wrote: >> > >> > > I understand. The discussion we had was around the current distributions >> > > ship with Sqoop 1.x as the default sqoop product (primarily because >> > > Sqoop 2 >> > > is in preview releases currently. The current focus of the team is to >> > > bring sqoop 2 to fruition quickly but Sqoop 1.x is the release that >> > > customers currently are using and hence the suggestion. >> > > >> > > Venkat >> > > >> > > >> > > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Venkat Ranganathan < >> > > > vranganat...@hortonworks.com> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > I would also suggest we revert back to >> > > > > making Sqoop 1 the default sqoop version >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > Wouldn't that make an upgrade from Bigtop 0.6 to 0.7 a Sqoop downgrade? >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Best regards, >> > > > >> > > > - Andy >> > > > >> > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet >> > > > Hein >> > > > (via Tom White) >> > > > >> > >
