aurora-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Maxim Khutornenko <ma...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
Date Fri, 21 Aug 2015 17:56:52 GMT
That's actually a good point, which reminds me to ask about the commit
history. Any chance to do a sapling split to preserve history?

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org> wrote:
> Maxim,
>
> I really think it is important to minimize the changes made to the twitter
> commons files so one can reference the twitter commons sha bc7248d to see
> the history of the files.
>
> I filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1442 to track updating
> the copyright headers and moving the files into the namespace.
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Maxim Khutornenko <maxim@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> I am afraid the upcoming namespace changing sweeper is going to be
>> even more monstrous as it will touch all of commons and almost all of
>> the aurora codebase.
>>
>> One alternative could be bring all commons in with all headers and
>> apache namespace changes but still reference published external
>> commons jars on aurora side. Then switch to internal commons and
>> adjust aurora imports as a follow up. That would at least avoid the
>> churn in commons files.
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Henry Saputra <henry.saputra@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > +1 for doing it in follow up commit
>> >
>> > On Friday, August 21, 2015, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Jake,
>> >>
>> >> Can the namespace rename be done in a follow up commit? Otherwise the
>> >> review/commit touches every single Java file and becomes very difficult
>> to
>> >> understand.
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org
>> >> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Since the IP has been donated to the ASF the namespace
>> com/twitter/common
>> >> > has to be switch to the Apache namespace org/apache/aurora
>> >> >
>> >> > -Jake
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org
>> >> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > I was able to put up the review for the fork:
>> >> > > https://reviews.apache.org/r/37666/.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Please take a look if you are interested.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Kevin Sweeney <kevints@apache.org
>> >> <javascript:;>>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > +1, I suspect we'll find several things that can be replaced
by
>> the
>> >> > Java
>> >> > > 8
>> >> > > > standard library or newer versions of Guava and Guice.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org
>> >> <javascript:;>>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > > Just to be clear, I'm proposing forking the java parts
only.
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Joseph Smith <
>> yasumoto7@gmail.com
>> >> <javascript:;>>
>> >> > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > > Also a (tough to concede) +1. Although I’m not
a fan of the
>> fork,
>> >> > it
>> >> > > > will
>> >> > > > > > help improve velocity and empower a migration away
from
>> twitter
>> >> > > common.
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:15 PM, Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org
>> >> <javascript:;>>
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > That's roughly the eventual plan, which this
move would
>> help us
>> >> > > > > > facilitate.
>> >> > > > > > > We use guava heavily already, most of our
current
>> dependence is
>> >> > on
>> >> > > ZK
>> >> > > > > > and args handling code...but we would look towards
dep-shallow
>> >> > > > > alternatives.
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >    _____________________________
>> >> > > > > > > From: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@gmail.com
<javascript:;>>
>> >> > > > > > > Sent: Friday, July 3, 2015 8:03 AM
>> >> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Forking twitter-commons into
our tree
>> >> > > > > > > To:  <dev@aurora.apache.org <javascript:;>>
>> >> > > > > > > Cc: Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>>
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > I'll see what I can do about IP clearance.
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > For giggles, how much work do you think it
would be to shed
>> >> > > > > > twitter-commons
>> >> > > > > > > and just rely on guava and other what I would
consider more
>> >> > > standard
>> >> > > > > > > libraries.
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Bill Farner
<
>> >> wfarner@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks, Jake!
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >> -=Bill
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jake Farrell
<
>> >> > jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >>> yes, makes it easier to donate when
its Apache License
>> 2.0,
>> >> but
>> >> > > > still
>> >> > > > > > >>> requires the IP clearance [1], which
is handled through
>> the
>> >> > IPMC.
>> >> > > > > This
>> >> > > > > > is
>> >> > > > > > >>> required so there is an audit trail
of that software being
>> >> > > donated
>> >> > > > to
>> >> > > > > > the
>> >> > > > > > >>> ASF
>> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >>> -Jake
>> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >>> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
>> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Bill
Farner <
>> >> > wfarner@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>> Jake - i'm not fully versed on
licenses, but is that true
>> >> even
>> >> > > > > though
>> >> > > > > > >>> it's
>> >> > > > > > >>>> all Apache License 2.0?
>> >> > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>> -=Bill
>> >> > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM,
Jake Farrell <
>> >> > > jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >>> wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>> no objections, but we would
have to get an IP clearance
>> doc
>> >> > > from
>> >> > > > > > >>> Twitter
>> >> > > > > > >>>>> for this code in order to
bring this code into the ASF
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>> -Jake
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:20
PM, Zameer Manji <
>> >> > > zmanji@apache.org <javascript:;>>
>> >> > > > > > >>> wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Hey,
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Aurora depends heavily
on twitter-commons for lots of
>> >> > > > > > >> functionality.
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> However upstream is not
very active and I suspect that
>> it
>> >> > will
>> >> > > > be
>> >> > > > > > >>> less
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> active in the future.
Currently we depend on artifacts
>> >> > > published
>> >> > > > > > >> from
>> >> > > > > > >>>>> this
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> project which causes us
to depend on older versions of
>> >> guava
>> >> > > and
>> >> > > > > > >>> guice.
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> As a result, it seems
that will be difficult to address
>> >> > > tickets
>> >> > > > > > >> like
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> AURORA-1380 <
>> >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1380>
>> >> > > > > > >>>> without
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> changing something. I
propose we fork all of the java
>> >> > portions
>> >> > > > of
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> twitter-commons into our
tree, remove the parts we
>> don't
>> >> use
>> >> > > and
>> >> > > > > > >>> update
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> guava and guice so we
can move forward on this front.
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> What are people's thoughts
on this?
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> --
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Zameer Manji
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > --
>> >> > > > > > > Cheers,
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > Chris Aniszczyk
>> >> > > > > > > http://aniszczyk.org
>> >> > > > > > > +1 512 961 6719
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > --
>> >> > > > > > Zameer Manji
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > <%2B1%20512%20961%206719>
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > --
>> >> > > > Zameer Manji
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Zameer Manji
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>>
>> --
>> Zameer Manji
>>
>>

Mime
View raw message