Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-hadoop-dev-archive@locus.apache.org Received: (qmail 27334 invoked from network); 3 May 2007 17:49:28 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 May 2007 17:49:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 74331 invoked by uid 500); 3 May 2007 17:49:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-hadoop-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 74308 invoked by uid 500); 3 May 2007 17:49:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact hadoop-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: hadoop-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list hadoop-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 74298 invoked by uid 99); 3 May 2007 17:49:34 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 May 2007 10:49:34 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [206.18.177.53] (HELO alnrmhc13.comcast.net) (206.18.177.53) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 May 2007 10:49:26 -0700 Received: from [192.168.168.15] (c-71-202-24-246.hsd1.ca.comcast.net[71.202.24.246]) by comcast.net (alnrmhc13) with ESMTP id <20070503174904b1300f0hkoe>; Thu, 3 May 2007 17:49:05 +0000 Message-ID: <463A2090.4040608@apache.org> Date: Thu, 03 May 2007 10:49:04 -0700 From: Doug Cutting User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070403) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: hadoop-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: [jira] Resolved: (HADOOP-435) Encapsulating startup scripts and jars in a single Jar file. References: <32753438.1178141175361.JavaMail.jira@brutus> <4DFAB90F-A8A5-421F-A355-DB83EE2948A3@yahoo-inc.com> In-Reply-To: <4DFAB90F-A8A5-421F-A355-DB83EE2948A3@yahoo-inc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Nigel Daley wrote: > Just expressing my disappointment that this patch wasn't applied as is > and then another Jira opened to rework the scripts. Should have spoken > up earlier. Re-open it if you like. I don't see why we can't re-work the script as a part of this issue. Otherwise we end up with duplicated logic with no guarantee that it will ever be removed. The script change should be easy. Doug