The group IDs and versions can be parameterized in the POM so they can be 
overridden on the maven command line with -D. That would be easy and something 
I think we could get committed without any controversy. 


> On Sep 11, 2015, at 6:53 AM, James Heather <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Yes, my plan is to create a fork of the main repo, so that we can still merge 
> new Phoenix code into the CDH-compatible version.
> 
> Before that, I do wonder whether it's possible to suggest a few changes to 
> the main repo that would allow for compiling a CDH-compatible version, 
> without needing to maintain a separate repo. The bulk of the changes are to 
> dependencies in the pom, which suggests that it could be done to accept a 
> switch to mvn build.
> 
> James
> 
>> On 11/09/15 14:50, Andrew Purtell wrote:
>> The first step I think is a repo with code that compiles. Please initialize 
>> it by forking github.com/apache/phoenix so we have common ancestors. Once we 
>> have a clear idea (by diff) what is required we can figure out if we can 
>> support compatibility in some way.
>> 
>> 
>> On Sep 9, 2015, at 11:00 PM, Krishna <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> I can volunteer to spend some time on this. 
>>> 
>>> CDH artifacts are available in Maven repo but from reading other threads on 
>>> CDH-Phoenix compatibilty, it looks like there are some code changes to be 
>>> made in Phoenix to successfully compile against CDH. 
>>> 
>>> Here are questions to address:
>>> 1) How to maintain CDH compatible Phoenix code base?
>>> 2) Is having a CDH compatible branch even an option?
>>> 
>>> Krishna
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Friday, August 28, 2015, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> Yes I am interested. Assuming CDH artifacts are publicly available in a 
>>>> Maven repo somewhere, which I believe is the case, perhaps we (the Phoenix 
>>>> project/community) could set up a Jenkins job that builds against them and 
>>>> makes the resulting build artifacts available. They would never be an 
>>>> official release, just a best effort convenience. Would that work? I think 
>>>> little must be done besides compile against the CDH artifacts for binary 
>>>> compatibility.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> > On Aug 28, 2015, at 11:19 AM, James Heather <[email protected]> 
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Is anyone interested in helping with getting an up-to-date 
>>>> > CDH5-compatible build of Phoenix up and running?
>>>> >
>>>> > Cloudera has a build of Phoenix 4.3 
>>>> > (https://github.com/cloudera-labs/phoenix),                     but this 
>>>> > is now two versions behind, and there seems little desire at Cloudera to 
>>>> > keep it updated.
>>>> >
>>>> > I imagine that by looking at the differences between vanilla 4.3 and 
>>>> > cloudera labs 4.3, and with some guidance from this list, we could get a 
>>>> > good idea of what would need to be modified in 4.5+ and keep a 
>>>> > CDH5-compatible build up to date.
>>>> >
>>>> > Yes?
>>>> >
>>>> > James
> 

Reply via email to