[build] update group id to site.ycsb #1352
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
risdenk
reviewed
Sep 9, 2019
busbey
force-pushed
the
groupdId-for-ycsb.site
branch
from
56ff88e to
0fd01cd
Compare
|
rebased the branch to current master and updated it for the Volt DB binding landing. |
busbey
force-pushed
the
groupdId-for-ycsb.site
branch
from
0fd01cd to
fe16365
Compare
|
@busbey |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This moves all group ids in the project to be "site.ycsb" from "com.yahoo.ycsb." This is necessary if we want to publish artifacts to Maven Central since as a project we're no longer associated with Yahoo! and they control who publishes artifacts within "com.yahoo".
Tested locally with a clean build and running the basicdb to load and run workload a both in the source checkout and the distribution tarball.
Note that this doesn't change java packages (will be a different PR) and it doesn't address the regression on #908 that came up in the 0.16.0 testing on #1265 .