; To: "hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org"
> Cc: "common-dev@hadoop.apache.org"
> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:01 PM
> Subject: Re: hadoop-hdfs-client splitoff is going to break code
>
> Thanks for being proactive here, Steve. I think this is a good example of
dev@hadoop.apache.org"
> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:01 PM
> Subject: Re: hadoop-hdfs-client splitoff is going to break code
>
> Thanks for being proactive here, Steve. I think this is a good example of
> why this change should have been done in a branch rather than
quot;common-dev@hadoop.apache.org"
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:01 PM
Subject: Re: hadoop-hdfs-client splitoff is going to break code
Thanks for being proactive here, Steve. I think this is a good example of
why this change should have been done in a branch rather than having been
do
> On 19 Oct 2015, at 22:01, Colin P. McCabe wrote:
>
> Thanks for being proactive here, Steve.
no, just building downstream things. Caught a failure of spark to build against
trunk too, but that's a one liner to import the no-deprecated Auth Exception
> I think this is a good example of
> wh
Thanks for being proactive here, Steve. I think this is a good example of
why this change should have been done in a branch rather than having been
done directly in trunk.
regards,
Colin
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Steve Loughran
wrote:
> just an FYI, the split off of hadoop hdfs into c
The jira tracking this issue is: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9241
+1 on option 2
I think it makes sense to make hadoop-client directly depend on hadoop-hdfs
(which itself depends on hadoop-hdfs-client).
Ciao,
Mingliang Liu
Member of Technical Staff - HDFS,
Hortonworks Inc.
m...
+1 on option 2.
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 10:56 AM, larry mccay wrote:
> Interesting...
>
> As long as #2 provides full backward compatibility and the ability to
> explicitly exclude the server dependencies that seems the best way to go.
> That would get my non-binding +1.
> :)
>
> Perhaps we coul
Option 2 sounds good to me. It might make sense to make hadoop-client
directly depends on Hadoop-hdfs?
Haohui
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 10:56 AM larry mccay wrote:
> Interesting...
>
> As long as #2 provides full backward compatibility and the ability to
> explicitly exclude the server dependenci
Interesting...
As long as #2 provides full backward compatibility and the ability to
explicitly exclude the server dependencies that seems the best way to go.
That would get my non-binding +1.
:)
Perhaps we could add another artifact called hadoop-thin-client that would
not be backward compatible
