You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@hbase.apache.org by stack <st...@duboce.net> on 2009/08/26 20:28:56 UTC

Deprecate o.a.h.h.rest in 0.20.0?

Should we deprecate the o.a.h.h.rest in favor of stargate?  Its confusing
having two offerings.  If we are going to deprecate one, lets do it now
before we make an RC3 (I'm +1 on deprecating o.a.h.h.rest in favor of
stargate).
St.Ack

Re: Deprecate o.a.h.h.rest in 0.20.0?

Posted by stack <st...@duboce.net>.

apurtell +1'd over in hbase-1799.
St.Ack

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:28 AM, stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:

> Should we deprecate the o.a.h.h.rest in favor of stargate?  Its confusing
> having two offerings.  If we are going to deprecate one, lets do it now
> before we make an RC3 (I'm +1 on deprecating o.a.h.h.rest in favor of
> stargate).
> St.Ack
>

Re: Deprecate o.a.h.h.rest in 0.20.0?

Posted by stack <st...@duboce.net>.

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Jim Kellerman (POWERSET) <
Jim.Kellerman@microsoft.com> wrote:

> So if we do this, Stargate moves out of contrib and into the main tree?
>

No.  Stargate would stay where it is.  I'd commit the patch deprecating
o.a.h.h.rest before we cut release candidate 3 and we'd just remove
o.a.h.h.rest in 0.21 hbase.
St.Ack

RE: Deprecate o.a.h.h.rest in 0.20.0?

Posted by "Jim Kellerman (POWERSET)" <Ji...@microsoft.com>.

So if we do this, Stargate moves out of contrib and into the main tree?
BTW, I'm +1 for Stargate.

-----Original Message-----
From: saint.ack@gmail.com [mailto:saint.ack@gmail.com] On Behalf Of stack
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 11:29 AM
To: hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: Deprecate o.a.h.h.rest in 0.20.0?

Should we deprecate the o.a.h.h.rest in favor of stargate?  Its confusing having two offerings.  If we are going to deprecate one, lets do it now before we make an RC3 (I'm +1 on deprecating o.a.h.h.rest in favor of stargate).
St.Ack