hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aditya <adityakish...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: DISCUSSION: 1.0.0
Date Mon, 21 Jul 2014 03:37:41 GMT
The wrapper jar is part of the first patch, which is in git mailbox patch
format.


On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:

> You may want to attach the wrapper jar to the JIRA directly.
>
> Cheers
>
> On Jul 19, 2014, at 1:52 AM, Aditya <adityakishore@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Looks like the regular patch command skips any binary included in patches.
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 1:37 AM, Aditya <adityakishore@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for taking a look Ted!
>>
>> Looks like the second patch created with "git diff" excluded the Gradle
>> wrapper JAR from the patch.
>>
>> I would generate a new one which includes this this jar. In the meantime,
>> you should be able to use the first patch attached to the JIRA which is in
>> git-am format and that would let you build.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Nice work, Aditya.
>>>
>>> Looks like the hbase-native-client profile requires gradle ?
>>>
>>>      [exec] Error: Could not find or load main class
>>> org.gradle.wrapper.GradleWrapperMain
>>>
>>> Will take a look at your patch.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Aditya <adityakishore@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> As requested, I have attached a combined patch to the umbrella JIRA
>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-1015> and submitted it
to
>>>>
>>>> jenkins.
>>>>
>>>> Would be great if someone could take a look and provide feedback.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> aditya...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Aditya <adityakishore@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > I was hoping to get some initial comments before attaching patches
>>>> for the
>>>> > build boat.
>>>> >
>>>> > I have broken the entire code into 5 patch sets, layered in a sequnce,
>>>> > each focusing on a particular area (public headers/JNI
>>>> > implementation/Examples+unit test, etc) for the ease of review.
>>>> >
>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23175/
>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23176/
>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23177/
>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23178/
>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23179/
>>>> >
>>>> > These are also available as a sequence of patches as the pull request
>>>> > <https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/1>.
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > Only the last patch hooks everything to the HBase build process
>>>> > (optionally) and hence I was thinking of squashing these separate
>>>> patches
>>>> > into a single patch to be submitted for build.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> This ticket has only open subtasks, ie nothing in 'patch available'.
>>>> I
>>>> >> assume you mean HBASE-10168. We'll see about getting you some
>>>> reviews, but
>>>> >> you should also go about formatting the patch for buildbot. Also,
>>>> since
>>>> >> your 3 reviews are individually 100+k, you should consider breaking
>>>> them
>>>> >> into three separate tickets.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> my 2¢
>>>> >> -n
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Aditya <adityakishore@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> Sorry about that.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Here is the umbrella JIRA
>>>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-1015
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> Would you mind including the JIRA numbers along with the
request?
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Thanks,
>>>> >>>> Nick
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Aditya <adityakishore@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>> Do we want to have the C APIs part of 1.0.0 release.
I had posted
>>>> few
>>>> >>>>> patches and a set of review request sometime last week.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Enis Söztutar <enis.soz@gmail.com
>>>> >
>>>> >>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Mikhail Antonov
<
>>>> >>>>> olorinbant@gmail.com>
>>>> >>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >>>>> >
>>>> >>>>> > > Moved ZK watcher & listener subtask out
of scope HBASE-10909.
>>>> Enis
>>>> >>>>> - with
>>>> >>>>> > > that, I guess HBASE-10909 can be marked in
branch-1?
>>>> >>>>> > >
>>>> >>>>> >
>>>> >>>>> > Sounds good.
>>>> >>>>> >
>>>> >>>>> >
>>>> >>>>> > >
>>>> >>>>> > > HBASE-11464 - this is the jira where I'll
capture tasks to
>>>> >>>>> abstract hbase
>>>> >>>>> > > client from ZK (mostly it would be post-1.0
work).
>>>> >>>>> > >
>>>> >>>>> >
>>>> >>>>> > Not sure whether we can make it fully backwards
compatible with
>>>> 1.0
>>>> >>>>> > clients. I guess we will see when the patches are
done.
>>>> >>>>> >
>>>> >>>>> >
>>>> >>>>> > >
>>>> >>>>> > > Thanks,
>>>> >>>>> > > Mikhail
>>>> >>>>> > >
>>>> >>>>> > >
>>>> >>>>> > > 2014-07-03 12:52 GMT-07:00 Stack <stack@duboce.net>:
>>>> >>>>> > >
>>>> >>>>> > > > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Mikhail
Antonov <
>>>> >>>>> olorinbant@gmail.com
>>>> >>>>> > >
>>>> >>>>> > > > wrote:
>>>> >>>>> > > >
>>>> >>>>> > > > > Guys,
>>>> >>>>> > > > >
>>>> >>>>> > > > > getting back to ZK abstraction work
w.r.t. release 1.0 and
>>>> >>>>> > thereafter,
>>>> >>>>> > > > some
>>>> >>>>> > > > > status update. So as we're getting
closer to complete
>>>> >>>>> HBASE-10909, it
>>>> >>>>> > > > looks
>>>> >>>>> > > > > like the steps may be like this:
>>>> >>>>> > > > >
>>>> >>>>> > > > >  - there are 2 subtasks out there
not closed yet, one of
>>>> which
>>>> >>>>> is
>>>> >>>>> > about
>>>> >>>>> > > > log
>>>> >>>>> > > > > splitting (and Sergey S has submitted
a patch for review),
>>>> >>>>> another is
>>>> >>>>> > > > > abstraction of ZK watcher (this
is what I've been working
>>>> on
>>>> >>>>> in the
>>>> >>>>> > > > > background; but after sketching
the patch it seems like
>>>> >>>>> without being
>>>> >>>>> > > > able
>>>> >>>>> > > > > to modify the control flows and
some changes in the module
>>>> >>>>> structure,
>>>> >>>>> > > > it'd
>>>> >>>>> > > > > be a lot of scaffolding code not
really simplifying
>>>> current
>>>> >>>>> code). So
>>>> >>>>> > > I'd
>>>> >>>>> > > > > propose to descope abstraction of
ZK watcher jira
>>>> >>>>> (HBASE-11073),
>>>> >>>>> > > namely:
>>>> >>>>> > > > > convert it to top-level JIRA and
continue to work on it
>>>> >>>>> separately;
>>>> >>>>> > > > rename
>>>> >>>>> > > > > HBASE-10909 to "ZK abstraction:
phase 1", and mark it as
>>>> >>>>> closed as
>>>> >>>>> > soon
>>>> >>>>> > > > as
>>>> >>>>> > > > > log splitting jira is completed.
This way HBASE-10909
>>>> fits to
>>>> >>>>> > branch-1.
>>>> >>>>> > > > >
>>>> >>>>> > > >
>>>> >>>>> > > > Sounds good to me.
>>>> >>>>> > > >
>>>> >>>>> > > >
>>>> >>>>> > > > >  - secondly, in the discussion to
the CatalogTracker
>>>> patch, we
>>>> >>>>> > started
>>>> >>>>> > > > > talking about modifying client to
not know about ZK, but
>>>> >>>>> rather keep
>>>> >>>>> > > the
>>>> >>>>> > > > > location of current masters and
talk to them using RPC
>>>> calls.
>>>> >>>>> This
>>>> >>>>> > work
>>>> >>>>> > > > can
>>>> >>>>> > > > > not go into branch-1, as it involves
invasive changes in
>>>> client
>>>> >>>>> > > including
>>>> >>>>> > > > > new RPC. As I understand the branching
schema now, those
>>>> >>>>> changes can
>>>> >>>>> > go
>>>> >>>>> > > > to
>>>> >>>>> > > > > master branch, we just don't merge
them to branch-1, and
>>>> >>>>> depending on
>>>> >>>>> > > > their
>>>> >>>>> > > > > completeness we can pull them to
1.1 release or so.
>>>> >>>>> > > > >
>>>> >>>>> > > >
>>>> >>>>> > > > You have it right Mikhail.
>>>> >>>>> > > >
>>>> >>>>> > > > St.Ack
>>>> >>>>> > > >
>>>> >>>>> > >
>>>> >>>>> > >
>>>> >>>>> > >
>>>> >>>>> > > --
>>>> >>>>> > > Thanks,
>>>> >>>>> > > Michael Antonov
>>>> >>>>> > >
>>>> >>>>> >
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

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