accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Proposed binary packaging changes
Date Mon, 18 Jul 2016 20:36:57 GMT
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 4:35 PM Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> Christopher wrote:
> >> I've had quite the foray into ASF release policies over the past two
> >> >  days which brings me back to this.
> >> >
> >> >  I really don't believe that the amount of effort you claim we will
> save
> >> >  will actually be beneficial overall. Our dependencies do not
> frequently
> >> >  change which means that our L&N also do not frequently change.
> >> >
> >> >  Even if I do concede that it will make things more simple for
> Accumulo
> >> >  in the short-term, you're forcing change from N organizations which
> >> >  already integrate Accumulo in its current state (you would force all
> >> >  downstream to change). I would rather solve this once in Accumulo.
> >> >
> >> >  If you want to create such a script to help users build their own
> >> >  artifact for their specific installation: great. I believe that the
> >> >  argument that such a script would save time in Accumulo in managing
> our
> >> >  L&N is false.
> >> >
> >
> > I know it would have saved me a ton of time (and sanity) moving to
> > commons-math3. How often it saves us time is debatable, agreed. But,
> that's
> > not a primary motivation. It's just a slight benefit, which might reduce
> > the burden of bumping dep versions.
> >
> > I have a PR ready to push... not sure I'm 100% happy with it, because of
> > the way it downloads deps one at a time (might be easier to download then
> > all at once using maven... but with some complication), and some of the
> > changes need to be pushed as a separate commit anyway. So perhaps you'll
> be
> > able to see better what I'm thinking when you can see the changeset.
> >
> > As I said before, this isn't really about a single (or a few) big
> > benefit(s). It's about numerous tiny ones, which are admittedly hard to
> > measure. Whether it pays off in the long-run is hard to tell, but that's
> > what I'm targeting... the long-term, though there may be some road bumps
> in
> > the short-term. I'm convinced this is the right thing to do, but I can
> > understand the reluctance to accept my conclusion, when I've not done a
> > good job of articulating dramatic, easy-to-see benefits.:(
> >
>
> Would it be better for me to wait for your push before continuing
> discussion? I feel like it's hard to talk over hypotheticals and might
> just be distracting :). With changes, we can outline positives/negatives
> rather than feelings.
>
>
Yes, I think that would be better. I'll provide a link to the PR in this
thread in case anybody's not watching PR notifications or JIRA.

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