accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com>
Subject Re: Contribute Examples/Exercises
Date Fri, 14 Nov 2014 19:57:43 GMT
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:57 PM, Mike Drob <madrob@cloudera.com> wrote:

> Having done this in the past, I have a hard time suggesting this approach.
>

never tried it.  Was there anything else you did not like about it (other
than being useless for bisect)?  The history would still be in accumulo
repo.


> As a single module, the code probably won't compile for most of the history
> that we preserve, so it's not like we'd be able to efficiently bisect or
> take advantage of the history.
>
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Keith Turner <keith@deenlo.com> wrote:
>
> > We can try using git fitler-branch to create the repo and preserve
> history.
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Since there's an opinion to create an examples repo instead of keeping
> > > them in the base project, I'm -0 as long we CI set up so that they
> don't
> > go
> > > silently into the night as I previously state as a concern.
> > >
> > > Some general questions for actually doing this: do we schedule the move
> > of
> > > the classes out of the main project for 1.7.0? Will this other repo
> > follow
> > > the same development practices as the project (e.g. branch names). How
> > will
> > > we release these examples?
> > >
> > > Can someone step up to make sure all of the above are
> completed/addressed
> > > and file the necessary INFRA JIRA issues?
> > >
> > >
> > > David Medinets wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1
> > >> On Nov 14, 2014 11:18 AM, "Keith Turner"<keith@deenlo.com>  wrote:
> > >>
> > >>  On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Corey Nolet<cjnolet@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>  Josh,
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which
> goes
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> You do have a good point. My hope was that this could be the
> beginning
> > >>>> of
> > >>>> our changing history so that we could begin to encourage the
> community
> > >>>> to
> > >>>> contribute their own source directly and give them an outlet for
> doing
> > >>>>
> > >>> so.
> > >>>
> > >>>> I understand that's also the intent of hosting open source repos
> under
> > >>>>
> > >>> ASF
> > >>>
> > >>>> to begin with- so I'm partial to either outcome.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher
> > had
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people
> > >>>> externally
> > >>>> (more "how do I do X" examples) and internally (keep devs honest
> about
> > >>>>
> > >>> how
> > >>>
> > >>>> our APIs are implemented).
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I would think that would just require keeping the repos up to date
> as
> > >>>> versions change so they wouldn't get out of date and possibly
> > releasing
> > >>>> them w/ our other releases.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Wherever they end up living, thank you Adam for the contributions!
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  I'll 2nd that.
> > >>>
> > >>> For the following reasons, I think it might be nice to move existing
> > >>> examples out of core into their own git repo(s).
> > >>>
> > >>>   * Examples would be based on released version of Accumulo
> > >>>   * Examples could easily be built w/o building all of Accumulo
> > >>>   * As Sean said, this would keep us honest
> > >>>   * The examples poms would serve as examples more than they do when
> > >>> part of
> > >>> Accumulo build
> > >>>   * Less likely to use non public APIs in examples
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Josh Elser<josh.elser@gmail.com>
> > >>>>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which
> goes
> > >>>>> moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. I
think
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> there's
> > >>>
> > >>>> precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned,
> > next
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> to
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more
"how
> do
> > I
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> do
> > >>>
> > >>>> X" examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs
are
> > >>>>> implemented).
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Bringing the examples into the core also encourages us to grow
the
> > >>>>> community which has been stagnant with respect to new committers
> for
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> about
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> 9 months now.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Corey Nolet wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>  +1 for adding the examples to contrib.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I was, myself, reading over this email wondering how a
set of 11
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> separate
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> examples on the use of Accumulo would fit into the core codebase-
> > >>>>>> especially as more are contributed over tinme. I like the
idea of
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> giving
> > >>>
> > >>>> community members an outlet for contributing examples that they've
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> built
> > >>>
> > >>>> so
> > >>>>>> that we can continue to foster that without having to fit
them in
> > the
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> core
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> codebase. It just seems more maintainable.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Josh Elser<josh.elser@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>   I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> "substantial".
> > >>>
> > >>>> Thanks.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Mike Drob wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>   The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples.
It's
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> clearly
> > >>>
> > >>>> non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered "substantial"
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elser<
> josh.elser@gmail.com
> > >
> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>   Sean Busbey wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>    On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser<
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> josh.elser@gmail.com>
> > >>>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>     Personally, I didn't really think that
this contribution
> was
> > >>>>>>>>>> in
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> the
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>   spirit
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> of what the new codebase adoption guidelines
were meant to
> > cover.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Some extra examples which leverage
what Accumulo already does
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> seems
> > >>>
> > >>>> more
> > >>>>>>>>>>> like improvements for new Accumulo
users than anything else.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>     It's content developed out side
of the project list.
> That's
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> all
> > >>>
> > >>>> it
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>   takes to
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> require the trip through the Incubator
checks as far as the
> ASF
> > >>>>>>>>>> guidelines
> > >>>>>>>>>> are concerned.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>     From http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>  """
> > >>>>>>>>>    From time to time, an external codebase
is brought into the
> > ASF
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> that
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> is
> > >>>>>>>>> not a separate incubating project but still
represents a
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> substantial
> > >>>
> > >>>> contribution that was not developed within the ASF's source control
> > >>>>>>>>> system
> > >>>>>>>>> and on our public mailing lists.
> > >>>>>>>>> """
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Not to look a gift-horse in the mouth (it is
great work), but I
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> don't
> > >>>
> > >>>> see
> > >>>>>>>>> these examples as "substantial". I haven't
found guidelines yet
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> that
> > >>>
> > >>>> better
> > >>>>>>>>> clarify the definition of "substantial".
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>
> >
>

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