Mailing-List: contact dev-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of mdrob@cloudera.com designates
 209.85.218.44 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAGUtCHrZvB=_iP5xi1SGouGPi3sxqOPdYcD=RE1T4DPjwp2ekA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAB27KGgNJooE96nLJmG2BxBMNerOrM4TWT=JeaXZ19A+PVZk9Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFX5SH=ufB8--yHaFM6w3-hPyLd=_OfNroffvp6j=ppKUUWshw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOiJXP6P7u6et6DS36Kjz03JYJbYGrwiNfJUiKh160YMicZ24Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <54623B88.6030506@gmail.com>
 <CAGHyZ6+s2hUTrPqnLhRwnKPhCjZJevzgAhffnjMFapqF4SRBYg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANndRmLrh8W_9HxUW8O5ay5H5aRwLhM6yciAdx5zFmJ=ps6hgQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <5463A779.3050609@gmail.com>
 <CAGHyZ6KPNOi=0cxYn5PVa0jszBpdEq+vKgDtOZ=ijWJoHdSaOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <5463ADC7.2010906@gmail.com>
 <CAFAMeY+BXrWWcZajgxvb49Tedj37m+HmAr143WX=aNz+DgHb6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <5463B2C0.40308@gmail.com>
 <CAOHP_tFXLk7DBMj2WqCsgfUCOXUS1fkCX1e4-4nRFk9S6ry0qA@mail.gmail.com>
 <5463BAE6.9070702@gmail.com>
 <CAOHP_tEYgjiV+YAAyH5=TbmG_Jr=9VRRMf5iQUaJ-M5_EGALzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGUtCHosDLG4MdacxdFhvmKc3RanVk+H8scrFx9iG_oweL97qQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOiJXP7me4Fas-3R9nh51H6tHL+wHGsyKb+bDVwxakGWpYQjBg@mail.gmail.com>
 <54664688.4070503@gmail.com>
 <CAGUtCHrZvB=_iP5xi1SGouGPi3sxqOPdYcD=RE1T4DPjwp2ekA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Drob <madrob@cloudera.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 12:57:42 -0600
Message-ID: 
 <CAFAMeY+9-z5HL26Cy1W+Y_gNW2vVtDn3hmKUcr3xRcL_qoKDzA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Contribute Examples/Exercises
To: Accumulo Dev List <dev@accumulo.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013a1ce8539fe20507d63593

--089e013a1ce8539fe20507d63593
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

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

--089e013a1ce8539fe20507d63593--