hadoop-mapreduce-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Owen O'Malley (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (MAPREDUCE-1638) Divide MapReduce into API and implementation source trees
Date Thu, 16 Jun 2011 21:48:47 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-1638?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13050755#comment-13050755

Owen O'Malley commented on MAPREDUCE-1638:

I can understand splitting up the client and server jars, but splitting up the API and implementation
only makes sense if you have different implementations and a test suite to test them.

Cleaning up the dependencies is a good thing, especially removing dependencies from the client
on the server code.

> Divide MapReduce into API and implementation source trees
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: MAPREDUCE-1638
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-1638
>             Project: Hadoop Map/Reduce
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: build, client
>            Reporter: Tom White
>            Assignee: Tom White
>         Attachments: MAPREDUCE-1638.patch, MAPREDUCE-1638.patch, MAPREDUCE-1638.sh
> I think it makes sense to separate the MapReduce source into public API and implementation
trees. The public API could be broken further into kernel and library trees.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


View raw message