incubator-kafka-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From p..@
Subject Re: Would a source only 0.7.0 release be better?
Date Mon, 05 Dec 2011 08:36:31 GMT
If you go this way, you're still left with two issues if you want
adoption to be smooth:

* KAFKA-133 which makes integrating clients hard otherwise
* Maybe building recipes for creating standard packages (rpm + deb)

Most people will install and configure kafka from a CM system (puppet,
chef or pallet) but it would still make life much easier if there were
packages. I suppose this would require the LICENSE thing to be clear
though.

FWIW i think the way cassandra handles this is very convenient (with a
separate package repository which holds releases) but only having debian
rules could already help a bit.

Now that being said, given the time the release has dragged on, I think
if a source only release speeds things up, it's for the best.

  - pyr

On Sun, Dec 04, 2011 at 08:52:45PM -0800, Neha Narkhede wrote:
> Chris,
> 
> Thanks for stepping up to help here. Based on feedback from various members
> on general@, I think it is wiser to do the source release, with the README
> having a "How to build and download dependencies" section.
> 
> We still have to go through all the jars we package in our source release,
> and right now we have about 17 of those. To reduce this overhead, I worked
> on KAFKA-222. I would encourage everyone to review this JIRA closely -
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-222
> 
> Since the build file for the contrib module has changed, can people who use
> hadoop-consumer and hadoop-producer help test it out ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Neha
> 
> On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Chris Burroughs
> <chris.burroughs@gmail.com>wrote:
> 
> > On 12/03/2011 02:40 PM, Chris Burroughs wrote:
> > > My reading is that since we would only be distributing source code, the
> > > NOTICE file should not reflect binary dependencies and would have *only*
> > > the standard Apache bit [3].  Same for LICENSE.
> >
> > I suppose any jar's checked into svn would complicate this a bit.
> > Perhaps it would also be best to exclude them, or just exclude contrib
> > where most of them seem to be.
> >

Mime
View raw message