Created attachment 154199 [details] shar file for port riak2 Bashio currently maintains two versions or riak, 1.4,x and 2.0.x riak 2 uses solr for searching. Yokozuna is the new implementation of Riak Search built atop Apache Solr. In order to properly build riak 2.0.5 a files from a custom solr build from bashio is required which makes difficult to create the port using textproc/apache-solr riak 2 don't require java or apache-solr to run. The search feature (yokozuna) is disable by default, but the build requires bashio solr4 files so that i can work as expected when required.
Created attachment 154202 [details] fixed riak conf dir $prefix/etc/riak Fixes riak conf dir to be ${prefix}/etc/riak
Created attachment 154204 [details] fixed to pass portlint (replace space with tabs) cosmetic change to pass portlint replacing spaces with tabs
Created attachment 154212 [details] implemented @sample implemented @sample on the port
Created attachment 154451 [details] build_depends lang/riak-erlang port BUILD_DEPENDS on port lang/riak-erlang port lang/riak-erglang builds a custom Basho's patched version of Erlang
Created attachment 154455 [details] fixed ENV pointing to riak-erlang Fixed port to properly work with port lang/riak-erlang
please explain the reason for having a new port (databases/riak2) instead of updating the old port. Assume that robak could transfer the maintainership of the port to you if he doesn't want to maintain it. I'm asking why we should have both versions supported. is riak2 not backwards compatible?
riak1 is different to riak2 mainly because of the search capabilities, Bashio maintains riak1 and riak2. Problem with this riak2 is that also uses a custom solr build in order to properly compile the port, something that robak can explain better. I have no problems helping robak updating,testing or maintaining either ports.
I didn't ask about the difference between version 1 and version 2. I asked what the justification is for having 2 ports rather than just update the existing databases/riak.
riak1 is different than riak2 therefor users may want to use only riak1 while others may want to use only riak2. hope this helps answer your question.
I'm sorry, it doesn't. If riak2 is backwards compatible, having two versions is not justified.
Ok no worries, then, what solution you propose and in what can I help you?
step 1) Find out if riak2 handles riak1 databases (even if it requires a dump export / import) step 2) Change this from an "add port" PR to an "update port" PR. Since Robak is not interested in riak2, you'd need to change the maintainer from him to you and he would have to be agree. I don't see why he wouldn't though.
P.S. You aren't "helping me". I didn't take this PR. I'm commenting on it.
Riak 1.4.x and 2.x although being the same database, are two different pieces of software with different capabilities and different dependencies, like already mentioned Solr (and not the stock one, that we have in ports, but the one provided by Basho) so this should indeed be a separate port. Given the 2.x version seems to be extremely picky about the deps origin (namely, they all need to come from Basho and cant be stock versions) I have no intention in handling nor maintaining such piece of software. However, for all the users that can have products using current Riak 1.x port (and for myself) I would still keep it in ports tree until is deprecated and not supported by upstream - so far it is on par with Riak 2.x.
as mentioned in bug 198656 , neither Robak nor I think riak2 is suitable to be built from source based on non-stock versions of multiple dependencies and the policies/attitudes of basho. Thus we don't support this PR. However, Basho reportedly does build their own FreeBSD binary packages, thus I would support a port that installs those binaries, one that has no dependencies.
This PR seems dead; nbari doesn't seem to like the idea of wrapping provided binaries so it is at an impasse.