hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jonathan Hsieh <...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: No security sources in 0.92.0 release tarballs.
Date Thu, 26 Jan 2012 22:11:34 GMT
Maven likes things a certain way and if it hard it usually because you are
not doing it the way the mavenista's have decreed.  Unfortunately, it isn't
clear to me what the right way to do it is.

Jon.

On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:30 PM, Gary Helmling <ghelmling@gmail.com> wrote:

> Jon,
>
> Thanks for spotting it.  I'll pick it up.  Assuming this means changes
> to src/assembly/all.xml...  I'll read up on the assembly plugin in.
>
> --gh
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jon@cloudera.com> wrote:
> > Andrew, Gary,
> >
> > Sorry, I should have written the initial message a little more clearly,
> but
> > Gary's clarification is spot on.
> >
> > I've filed it as a 0.94 and 0.92.1 blocker.
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5288
> >
> > Can one of you guys pick it up the fix for this?
> >
> > Jon.
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> >wrote:
> >
> >> So I reread this and I probably misunderstood for a moment what Jon was
> >> saying.
> >>
> >> I mentioned this in another email last week, regardless it is important
> to
> >> tag security as alpha and anyone who wants to seriously use it for more
> >> than just secure RPC is going to need to patch with HBASE-5195.
> >>
> >> So I presume 5195 and the sources will appear in 0.92.1.
> >>
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >>     - Andy
> >>
> >> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> >> (via Tom White)
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> >> > To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <dev@hbase.apache.org>
> >> > Cc:
> >> > Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 11:39 AM
> >> > Subject: Re: No security sources in 0.92.0 release tarballs.
> >> >
> >> > Can't believe I missed that. I haven't been paying enough attention to
> >> > upstream.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > However, this isn't the worst thing that could have happened, without
> >> > HBASE-5195 in the upstream sources security isn't going to adequately
> >> > protect Gets. Also there is a shell nit to fix (HBASE-5265).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Put it 0.94. No problem. It wouldn't be unreasonable to consider
> >> > coprocessors more baked than security in upstream.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Best regards,
> >> >
> >> >     - Andy
> >> >
> >> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> Hein
> >> (via
> >> > Tom White)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> ________________________________
> >> >>  From: Jonathan Hsieh <jon@cloudera.com>
> >> >> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
> >> >> Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 11:29 AM
> >> >> Subject: No security sources in 0.92.0 release tarballs.
> >> >>
> >> >> Ugh, it looks like we all missed that 0.92.0 release tarballs (both
> >> >> security compile and normal) do not contain any of the source of the
> >> >> security work.
> >> >>
> >> >> Jon.
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> >> >> // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> >> >> // jon@cloudera.com
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > // jon@cloudera.com
>



-- 
// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// Software Engineer, Cloudera
// jon@cloudera.com

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