Hi Konstantin, hi Jay, Thanks for the replies and the prompt progress on the pull request. It looks like we will have a Flink RPM package in Bigtop very soon. For the remaining integration we can open follow-up pull requests.
If anything comes up while finishing up the work, please ping me! Cheers, Max On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 6:01 PM, jay vyas <[email protected]> wrote: > Yup , we're getting there ! I tend to this sometimes in after work hours, > I'll call the grad students tonite, and see if they want to make a final > push this wknd on it, i can help them. > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Maximilian. >> >> Indeed. the saga of getting Flink into the Apache Bigdata stack has a long >> history ;) It's good to see it's finally converges. Your proposal of >> breaking >> the existing PR in peces certainly makes sense! That's how we prefer to do >> things as well - smaller changes are easier to check, fix, and even revert >> if >> needed. >> >> Another thing: we normally would expect to have a single commit for JIRA, >> so >> it would make sense to squash (rebase) the existing PR into smaller number >> of >> commits. Otherwise, it is pretty hard to navigate through all of them. >> >> Please don't hesitate to ping the list shall you need any assistance. >> Regards, >> Cos >> >> On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 11:25AM, Maximilian Michels wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I'm an Apache Flink committer and I'd be very happy to see Flink enter >> > Bigtop. We have seen quite some interest in Bigtop in the Flink >> > community. I've been checking out Bhupendra Singh's pull request which >> > followed this thread: https://github.com/apache/bigtop/pull/93 >> > >> > The packaging of Flink remains one of the biggest hurdles for people >> > who want to install and run Flink on a cluster. Thus, that was my main >> > focus when reviewing the PR. Apart from a few issues I found, the pull >> > request looks good. It would be great if we could bring it into a >> > mergeable state. >> > >> > I wonder if it makes sense to break this pull request into several >> > pull requests? For example, one for the packaging, one for the puppet >> > scripts, and another one for the smoke tests. That could make >> > reviewing of the changes easier and people could already try out >> > incremental changes. I'd be happy to help out with the packaging and >> > scripting. >> > >> > What do you think about that? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Max >> > > > > -- > jay vyas
