Hi Jarcec - suggestions on what pom.xml should be renamed to? Regards, Kate
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm in. Let's rename the pom.xml to something different. > > Jarcec > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:42:48AM -0800, [email protected] wrote: >> Thanks Jarcec. I agree that if we are not going to support maven on trunk >> for now, we should close the related issues you pointed out. >> >> Regarding publishing of maven artifacts for Sqoop - that is still possible. >> I understand that using IVY you can generate the necessary POM artifacts. I >> believe Bilung recently did that exercise while doing the 1.4.0 release. >> >> Thanks, >> Arvind >> >> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >> > Hi Arvind, >> > Netbeans seems to be unable to process differently named pom.xml file. >> > However I can rename it back on my side manually, so I'm fine with simple >> > rename. >> > >> > If we officially discontinue our effort to move to maven build in 1.x (and >> > I definitely agree on that), I would also suggest to somehow close issues >> > regarding move to maven: >> > >> > * SQOOP-348 >> > * SQOOP-347 >> > * SQOOP-306 >> > >> > Also I'm curios whether we are able to push our artifacts to Apache Maven >> > repo as is requested in SQOOP-396 without proper pom.xml file? >> > >> > Jarcec >> > >> > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:22:20AM -0800, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: >> > > In that case, how about renaming the pom.xml to something else? You >> > > would you still be able to use it using the -f argument. Would that >> > > work? >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Arvind >> > > >> > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho >> > > <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > Please don't, I'm actually using it :-$ >> > > > >> > > > Jarcec >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 09:48:59AM -0800, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: >> > > >> Agreed. As a matter of fact, we should remove POM from the 1.x branch >> > > >> as it is confusing to many. >> > > >> >> > > >> I have filed SQOOP-408 to track this. >> > > >> Thanks,Arvind >> > > >> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Eric Wadsworth <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > Arvind, >> > > >> > >> > > >> > Thanks for the info! >> > > >> > >> > > >> > Perhaps there should be a comment in the pom explaining this. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > --- wad >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > On 12/12/2011 09:06 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> Hi Eric, >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> For the 1.x code line (trunk), we are not investing in fixing the >> > > >> >> maven build. Instead the focus is entirely on using ant. Once we >> > cut >> > > >> >> over to the next major revision, we will switch to a maven only >> > build. >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> Thanks, >> > > >> >> Arvind >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Eric Wadsworth<[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> Folks, >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> Sqoop builds with ant just fine. The tests pass ("ant test"). >> > This goes >> > > >> >>> against hadoop 0.23; at least, that's what shows up in the ivy >> > > >> >>> directories. >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> But in the pom.xml, there is a different dependency: >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> <!-- >> > > >> >>> <hadoopVersion>0.20.203.0</hadoopVersion> >> > > >> >>> --> >> > > >> >>> <!-- FIXME Cloudera Distribution dependency version --> >> > > >> >>> <hadoopVersion>0.20.2-cdh3u1</hadoopVersion> >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> Out of the box, I can build with maven, with just a couple of >> > tweaks >> > > >> >>> (skipping tests because one fails, rm CHANGES.txt to make the RAT >> > happy). >> > > >> >>> But if I switch to the other version of hadoop, I get lots of >> > errors. >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> Why the discrepancy between ant and mvn builds? Or am I missing >> > > >> >>> something? >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> --- wad >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> >
