I would hesitant as well. A part of the initial design of the Bigtop was to guarantee the dependencies consistency through out the stack. Yes, it didn't work all the time because different components were doing funny business and bringing in a lot of transitional shit.
However, we never did this on purpose. So, I'd rather don't have this option. -- Take care, Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik 2CAC 8312 4870 D885 8616 6115 220F 6980 1F27 E622 Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views of any company the author might be affiliated with at the moment of writing. On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Olaf Flebbe <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Roman, > > you remember we are symlinking jars? esp. zookeeper. It was feeling weird to > me at that time, now it will be desaster area. (because of netty dependency > changes in zookeeper). > > If we use old client we have to remove the symlink functionality in hadoop > build code as well. > > Right now i am hesitant to have different zookeeper versions in bigtop > (client and server). > > olaf > >> Am 30.04.2017 um 04:33 schrieb Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]>: >> >>> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:07 PM, Olaf Flebbe <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> There may be issues with netty and zookeeper within hadoop depending on each >>> other. >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-12928 >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13413 >>> >>> We have a dependency on curator as well >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-14187 ( only in hadoop 3 alpha) >>> >>> I didn't see all the mess when I initialy reviewed b00ac0936 >>> >>> I think we should roll back commit b00ac0936 to zookeeper-3.4.6 T I have >>> to revoke my LGTM ;-( >> >> One option is to have Zookeeper 3.4.6 as a service, but relax Hadoop >> dependency >> back to the default. Typically old clients work pretty well with new >> Zookeeper >> servers. >> >> What do y'all think? >> >> Thanks, >> Roman.
