Mailing-List: contact general-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@hadoop.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=holsman.net; s=google;
        h=references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding
         :content-type:message-id:cc:x-mailer:from:subject:date:to;
        b=SNGIPwE8eUumgRewfKNs+w7PvW/vuAUOGTKI3xlyAGgtNFFGGQ4Re0/JkUemumheQz
         SpjSIxqpXA3BOT5UJkJ5cy3JXJTKaZZZmGBuE2yFFpmYsnEXb0C7kq7Mvrmc/q4GO5N2
         rKmK+DERxDT9Is05qsxDpDJJMS1s0vAuY0q2U=
References: <D1B0544A-E594-4530-BAEA-46EFFE97676A@mac.com>
 <91A364F8-480F-4323-92F6-15B47D5A3C32@yahoo-inc.com>
In-Reply-To: <91A364F8-480F-4323-92F6-15B47D5A3C32@yahoo-inc.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8C148)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Message-Id: <88238863-C1CB-4932-9288-40655F225D59@holsman.net>
Cc: "general@hadoop.apache.org" <general@hadoop.apache.org>
From: Ian Holsman <hadoop@holsman.net>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Move project split down a level
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 03:32:03 -0500
To: "general@hadoop.apache.org" <general@hadoop.apache.org>

+1 full agreement.=20

I think it will be a pita admin wise (due to how svn authorization is set up=
), so it might slow down creation of a new branch, but its worth it.

---=20
Ian Holsman
AOL Inc
Ian.Holsman@teamaol.com
(703) 879-3128 / AIM:ianholsman=20

it's just a technicality

On Jan 14, 2011, at 2:25 AM, Eric Baldeschwieler <eric14@yahoo-inc.com> wrot=
e:

> +1
>=20
> Death to the project split!  Or short of that, anything to tame it.
>=20
> On Jan 13, 2011, at 10:18 PM, Nigel Daley wrote:
>=20
>> Folks,
>>=20
>> As I look more at the impact of the common/MR/HDFS project split on what a=
nd how we release Hadoop, I feel like the split needs an adjustment.  Many f=
olks I've talked to agree that the project split has caused us a splitting h=
eadache.  I think 1 relatively small change could alleviate some of that.
>>=20
>> CURRENT SVN REPO:
>>=20
>> hadoop / [common, mapreduce, hdfs] / trunk
>> hadoop / [common, mapreduce, hdfs] / branches
>>=20
>> PROPOSAL:
>>=20
>> hadoop / trunk / [common, mapreduce, hdfs]
>> hadoop / branches / [common, mapreduce, hdfs]
>>=20
>> We're a long way from releasing these 3 projects independently.  Given th=
at, they should be branched and released as a unit.  This SVN structure enfo=
rces that and provides a more natural place to keep a top level build and pk=
g scripts that operate across all 3 projects. =20
>>=20
>> Thoughts?
>>=20
>> Cheers,
>> Nige
>=20