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 18:05:34 GMT
Commented on the review. Yes, it involves having an intermediate repo
but isn't awfully complicated.

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org> wrote:
> What would the mechanics of a sapling split be? Should I split out the
> files into their own repo and then merge that in with our repo? If
> preserving history is important, would you mind leaving a comment on the
> review?
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Maxim Khutornenko <maxim@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> 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
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>> --
>> Zameer Manji
>>
>>

Mime
View raw message