>> 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) > > > > > > >
