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

        

Mime
View raw message