Re: Hadoop 2 support in a real release?
I don't like profiles - they complicate things (imagine what release process would look like, with proper versioning and tagging), and profiles are not as transparent as other options. I prefer using assembly per classifier, or having separate (sub)modules with different dependencies. Then a release of all of the variants (complete project) would be a single run, each would have clean classpath, and we'd have easier to comprehend project structure. Kind regards, Stevo Slavic On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: > Regarding mechanics, the fact that we have profiles available to do the > build already should make the process very simple ... roughly just adding > -Phadoop2 or some such. Internally, it is setting a few symbols and > tweaking the dependencies slightly. > > > > > On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Dmitriy Lyubimov >wrote: > > > +1 for something like that. Again, spark just makes tons of binary > releases > > bound to a specific flavor of H-1 or H-2 including CDH etc. > > > > Not sure if it is totally feasible with just build techniques (the > > ubiquitous #ifdef macros immediately spring up in mind, something i am > > totally not missing in java) but if it is, it is the way to go. > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 6:49 AM, Gokhan Capan wrote: > > > > > My vote would be releasing mahout with hadoop1 and hadoop2 classifiers > > > > > > Gokhan > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Sebastian Schelter < > > > ssc.o...@googlemail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Big +1 > > > > Am 23.05.2014 15:33 schrieb "Ted Dunning" : > > > > > > > > > What do folks think about spinning out a new version of 0.9 that > only > > > > > changes which version of Hadoop the build uses? > > > > > > > > > > There have been quite a few questions lately on this topic. > > > > > > > > > > My suggestion would be that we use minor version numbering to > > maintain > > > > this > > > > > and the normal 0.9 release simultaneously if we decide to do a bug > > fix > > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Hadoop 2 support in a real release?
Regarding mechanics, the fact that we have profiles available to do the build already should make the process very simple ... roughly just adding -Phadoop2 or some such. Internally, it is setting a few symbols and tweaking the dependencies slightly. On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Dmitriy Lyubimov wrote: > +1 for something like that. Again, spark just makes tons of binary releases > bound to a specific flavor of H-1 or H-2 including CDH etc. > > Not sure if it is totally feasible with just build techniques (the > ubiquitous #ifdef macros immediately spring up in mind, something i am > totally not missing in java) but if it is, it is the way to go. > > > > On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 6:49 AM, Gokhan Capan wrote: > > > My vote would be releasing mahout with hadoop1 and hadoop2 classifiers > > > > Gokhan > > > > > > On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Sebastian Schelter < > > ssc.o...@googlemail.com > > > wrote: > > > > > Big +1 > > > Am 23.05.2014 15:33 schrieb "Ted Dunning" : > > > > > > > What do folks think about spinning out a new version of 0.9 that only > > > > changes which version of Hadoop the build uses? > > > > > > > > There have been quite a few questions lately on this topic. > > > > > > > > My suggestion would be that we use minor version numbering to > maintain > > > this > > > > and the normal 0.9 release simultaneously if we decide to do a bug > fix > > > > release. > > > > > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Hadoop 2 support in a real release?
+1 for something like that. Again, spark just makes tons of binary releases bound to a specific flavor of H-1 or H-2 including CDH etc. Not sure if it is totally feasible with just build techniques (the ubiquitous #ifdef macros immediately spring up in mind, something i am totally not missing in java) but if it is, it is the way to go. On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 6:49 AM, Gokhan Capan wrote: > My vote would be releasing mahout with hadoop1 and hadoop2 classifiers > > Gokhan > > > On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Sebastian Schelter < > ssc.o...@googlemail.com > > wrote: > > > Big +1 > > Am 23.05.2014 15:33 schrieb "Ted Dunning" : > > > > > What do folks think about spinning out a new version of 0.9 that only > > > changes which version of Hadoop the build uses? > > > > > > There have been quite a few questions lately on this topic. > > > > > > My suggestion would be that we use minor version numbering to maintain > > this > > > and the normal 0.9 release simultaneously if we decide to do a bug fix > > > release. > > > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > > >
Re: Hadoop 2 support in a real release?
Gokhan, Your suggestion is far superior to what I had in mind. Let's pretend that yours is the real suggestion. On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 6:49 AM, Gokhan Capan wrote: > My vote would be releasing mahout with hadoop1 and hadoop2 classifiers > > Gokhan > > > On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Sebastian Schelter < > ssc.o...@googlemail.com > > wrote: > > > Big +1 > > Am 23.05.2014 15:33 schrieb "Ted Dunning" : > > > > > What do folks think about spinning out a new version of 0.9 that only > > > changes which version of Hadoop the build uses? > > > > > > There have been quite a few questions lately on this topic. > > > > > > My suggestion would be that we use minor version numbering to maintain > > this > > > and the normal 0.9 release simultaneously if we decide to do a bug fix > > > release. > > > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > > >
Re: Hadoop 2 support in a real release?
My vote would be releasing mahout with hadoop1 and hadoop2 classifiers Gokhan On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Sebastian Schelter wrote: > Big +1 > Am 23.05.2014 15:33 schrieb "Ted Dunning" : > > > What do folks think about spinning out a new version of 0.9 that only > > changes which version of Hadoop the build uses? > > > > There have been quite a few questions lately on this topic. > > > > My suggestion would be that we use minor version numbering to maintain > this > > and the normal 0.9 release simultaneously if we decide to do a bug fix > > release. > > > > Any thoughts? > > >
Re: Hadoop 2 support in a real release?
Big +1 Am 23.05.2014 15:33 schrieb "Ted Dunning" : > What do folks think about spinning out a new version of 0.9 that only > changes which version of Hadoop the build uses? > > There have been quite a few questions lately on this topic. > > My suggestion would be that we use minor version numbering to maintain this > and the normal 0.9 release simultaneously if we decide to do a bug fix > release. > > Any thoughts? >
Hadoop 2 support in a real release?
What do folks think about spinning out a new version of 0.9 that only changes which version of Hadoop the build uses? There have been quite a few questions lately on this topic. My suggestion would be that we use minor version numbering to maintain this and the normal 0.9 release simultaneously if we decide to do a bug fix release. Any thoughts?
