accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Vines <>
Subject Re: Releasing 1.5
Date Fri, 26 Apr 2013 20:35:18 GMT
I had issues running a hadoop2 compiled version of accumulo against CDH4, I
can't remember the specifics of it though.

When I said specialized packaging, I was thinking of a naming convention to
distinguish hadoop1 vs. hadoop2 ( vs. vendor-specific hadoop) compiled jars.

On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Billie Rinaldi <>wrote:

> I'm not sure we are talking about actual vendor-specific code.  We are
> deciding whether or not to create additional release tarballs that have
> been compiled against various vendors' Hadoop-compatible file systems.
> Assuming that we determine there is nothing prohibiting us from doing this,
> I think it would simply be up to the release manager (i.e. anyone who
> assembles a release and calls a vote for it).  If someone cares enough
> about a particular distribution to build and create an extra tarball, they
> can.  However, I don't think this is common for Apache projects --
> additional packaging is usually left to supporting companies.  I haven't
> even noticed any releases yet that come in Hadoop 1 and Hadoop 2 flavors.
> I haven't heard (until now) that Accumulo compiled against an appropriate
> version of Apache Hadoop will not work with CDH, but John says that's the
> case.  John, have you tried this?  Also, what is the "specialized
> packaging" you referred to?
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:32 PM, David Medinets
> <>wrote:
> > Does it make sense to put vendor-specific stuff under a contribs/vendors
> > directory? Doing so would certainly indicate that we are vendor-agnostic.
> > And give vendors an obvious place to contribute.
> >

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message