Re: really getting started with hbase packages

[Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>]

Can we commit to this? Get our ZK patches pushed into 3.2.0 with possible assistance? Then unbundle ZK, at least from the Cloudera packages?

+1

  - Andy




________________________________
From: Henry Robinson ...
To: Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
Cc: ...
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:20:39 PM
Subject: Re: really getting started with hbase packages

Hi - 

What are the diffs from ZK trunk to the version in the jar attached to HBASE-1329? I couldn't see immediately what changes there are to non HBase code. 

I'd be happy to work on getting any changes committed to ZK trunk; I've been doing most of the recent patches for the ZK CLI so can probably be of some help. Would this then allow us to have a single ZK jar, based on 3.2.0 when it is (hopefully imminently) released, upon which HBase and other applications could all depend?

Henry


On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:

Hi Christophe,

HBase has had one patch committed in the latest ZK release (3.1.1), one patch committed in 3.2.0 (ZK-431) and we will soon create a new one against 3.2.0 based on HBASE-1329 and HBASE-1532. I'm happy to take the ZK 3.2.0 release tarball and apply our edits -- perhaps in their final form after merge upstream if that can happen in time -- and make a separate package upon which the HBase package depends. Would this be satisfactory?

   - Andy


      

Re: really getting started with hbase packages

[Nitay <ni...@gmail.com>]

We can and already do push all our ZK changes back to them. When they
commit them, we simply update to their latest trunk jar. The potential
problem with what you suggest is it means us waiting till there is a
ZooKeeper release before we can make our own.

-n

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Andrew Purtell<ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> Can we commit to this? Get our ZK patches pushed into 3.2.0 with possible assistance? Then unbundle ZK, at least from the Cloudera packages?
>
> +1
>
>  - Andy
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Henry Robinson ...
> To: Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> Cc: ...
> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:20:39 PM
> Subject: Re: really getting started with hbase packages
>
> Hi -
>
> What are the diffs from ZK trunk to the version in the jar attached to HBASE-1329? I couldn't see immediately what changes there are to non HBase code.
>
> I'd be happy to work on getting any changes committed to ZK trunk; I've been doing most of the recent patches for the ZK CLI so can probably be of some help. Would this then allow us to have a single ZK jar, based on 3.2.0 when it is (hopefully imminently) released, upon which HBase and other applications could all depend?
>
> Henry
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Christophe,
>
> HBase has had one patch committed in the latest ZK release (3.1.1), one patch committed in 3.2.0 (ZK-431) and we will soon create a new one against 3.2.0 based on HBASE-1329 and HBASE-1532. I'm happy to take the ZK 3.2.0 release tarball and apply our edits -- perhaps in their final form after merge upstream if that can happen in time -- and make a separate package upon which the HBase package depends. Would this be satisfactory?
>
>   - Andy
>
>
>