You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@mahout.apache.org by Andrew Palumbo <ap...@outlook.com> on 2017/01/23 21:46:45 UTC
Dropping .zip archhive for mahout 0.13.0 binary artufact builds
It seems redundant to include botha *.zip and a *.tar.gz build for each binary distribution build. I propose that we drop the .zip archive and ship only .tar.gz builds with the 0.13.0 distro. Other projects do this, eg. Spark and Zeppelin. So there is precedent. If we did this, the archives that we would ship would be something like the following:
apache-mahout-0.13.0.tar.gz: basic jvm-only build (no native modules included)
apache-mahout-0.13.0-linux-x86_64.tar.gz: GPU/OpenMP build for Linux x86_64 (intel and amd)
apache-mahout-0.13.0-linux-x86_64-avx2.tar.gz: GPU/OpenMP build for Linux x86_64
with AVX2 instruction sets (Intel haswell and > though there is also an
AVX-512 which is newer, but I think that for now we can allow
people to build from src for that)
apache-mahout-0.13.0-mac_os.tar.gz: OpenMP only for mac
Thoughts?
Re: Dropping .zip archhive for mahout 0.13.0 binary artufact builds
Posted by Andrew Palumbo <ap...@outlook.com>.
Yes I've always thought that they were mainly for windows integration, but since these tarballs will be built for non-windows architectures specifically, I cant see any upside to wasting the space hosting them or the time testing them.
________________________________
From: Andrew Musselman <an...@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 4:56:31 PM
To: dev@mahout.apache.org
Subject: Re: Dropping .zip archhive for mahout 0.13.0 binary artufact builds
I'm not sure what .zip files offer that tarballs don't, aside from
potential non-supported OS support, sounds fine to me.
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Andrew Palumbo <ap...@outlook.com> wrote:
> It seems redundant to include botha *.zip and a *.tar.gz build for each
> binary distribution build. I propose that we drop the .zip archive and
> ship only .tar.gz builds with the 0.13.0 distro. Other projects do this,
> eg. Spark and Zeppelin. So there is precedent. If we did this, the
> archives that we would ship would be something like the following:
>
> apache-mahout-0.13.0.tar.gz:
> basic jvm-only build (no native modules included)
>
> apache-mahout-0.13.0-linux-x86_64.tar.gz: GPU/OpenMP
> build for Linux x86_64 (intel and amd)
>
> apache-mahout-0.13.0-linux-x86_64-avx2.tar.gz: GPU/OpenMP build
> for Linux x86_64
> with AVX2 instruction sets (Intel haswell and > though there is
> also an
> AVX-512 which is newer, but I think that for now we can allow
> people to build from src for that)
>
> apache-mahout-0.13.0-mac_os.tar.gz: OpenMP
> only for mac
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
Re: Dropping .zip archhive for mahout 0.13.0 binary artufact builds
Posted by Andrew Musselman <an...@gmail.com>.
I'm not sure what .zip files offer that tarballs don't, aside from
potential non-supported OS support, sounds fine to me.
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Andrew Palumbo <ap...@outlook.com> wrote:
> It seems redundant to include botha *.zip and a *.tar.gz build for each
> binary distribution build. I propose that we drop the .zip archive and
> ship only .tar.gz builds with the 0.13.0 distro. Other projects do this,
> eg. Spark and Zeppelin. So there is precedent. If we did this, the
> archives that we would ship would be something like the following:
>
> apache-mahout-0.13.0.tar.gz:
> basic jvm-only build (no native modules included)
>
> apache-mahout-0.13.0-linux-x86_64.tar.gz: GPU/OpenMP
> build for Linux x86_64 (intel and amd)
>
> apache-mahout-0.13.0-linux-x86_64-avx2.tar.gz: GPU/OpenMP build
> for Linux x86_64
> with AVX2 instruction sets (Intel haswell and > though there is
> also an
> AVX-512 which is newer, but I think that for now we can allow
> people to build from src for that)
>
> apache-mahout-0.13.0-mac_os.tar.gz: OpenMP
> only for mac
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>