heron-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Karthik Ramasamy <kart...@streaml.io>
Subject Re: Migrating Heron code to Apache
Date Wed, 08 Nov 2017 18:59:54 GMT
+1 for Taylor's approach as well.

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Bill Graham <billgraham@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 for that approach, thanks Taylor.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 10:47 AM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgoetz@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Another thing to keep in mind is that non-Apache release artifacts cannot
> > be hosted on ASF infrastructure. Even so, non-Apache releases can be cut
> > from an ASF-hosted git repository. Non-Apache releases also need to be
> > clearly labeled as such.
> >
> > In terms of moving from “com.twitter” to “org.apache” maven group names
> > and source code package names, I would highly recommend making the maven
> > group name change as well as changing the package names.
> >
> > As Jerry pointed out, Storm waited a long time to change package names to
> > “org.apache.storm” (maven group name change was immediate). One of the
> > reasons we were able to do this is because the original package name was
> > “backtype” as opposed to “com.backtype”. I wouldn’t be surprised if there
> > were IPMC pushback on making an Apache release with the “com.twitter”
> > package prefix. You’d likely need a compelling justification for not
> making
> > the change.
> >
> > In short, my recommendations:
> >
> > 1. Move to Apache git — you can still do non-Apache releases
> > 2. Change groupId/package prefixes to “org.apache.*” prior to attempting
> > an Apache release.
> >
> > -Taylor
> >
> >
> > > On Nov 7, 2017, at 7:32 PM, Julien Le Dem <julien.ledem@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Sorry for the late reply.
> > > +1 to moving to apache git first.
> > > +1 on using gitbox so that the github repo is writable. That should
> > > simplify a lot of things.
> > > When we migrated parquet, we first moved the code to apache git and
> only
> > > later renamed packages to the new org.apache.parquet namespace.
> > > For java artifacts. I'd recommend renaming packages and maven group in
> > the
> > > same release to avoid weird dependency conflicts (you don't want 2
> maven
> > > artifacts with different coordinates but same class name). If you
> follow
> > > this convention, you force yourself to post org.apache maven artifacts
> > only
> > > once you rename your packages.
> > > We still did a few twitter releases while the projects was not ready
> yet
> > to
> > > make apache release (updating the build, notice, etc). It is ok but it
> > must
> > > be very clear that those are not official apache releases. Official
> > Apache
> > > releases must be voted on by the PMC (and the IPMC in the incubator).
> And
> > > you need to make sure you're still mking progress towards apache
> official
> > > releases which is the point of the incubation.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 8:27 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacques@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I don't believe the location of the code influences the type of
> release
> > >> allowed. For example, I believe the Parquet project to did a
> non-Apache
> > >> release after migrating. Maybe Julien can confirm that. Or
> Jake/another
> > can
> > >> reconfirm/refute my memory.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Bill Graham <billgraham@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Jacques, I was under the impression that once the code was imported
> to
> > >>> apache, releases had to be apache releases. This would require 1 and
> a
> > >>> number of other changes. Is that not the case? The motivation for
> > doing 1
> > >>> first was so we could continue to cut releases as needed during that
> > >>> effort.
> > >>>
> > >>> On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 7:41 AM Jacques Nadeau <jacques@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> I'm -0 on plan.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Why not just import code then do changes 1 and 2 after 3? Just
seems
> > >> like
> > >>>> getting 3 done is a key blocking item on forward progress of the
> > >>> community.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Oct 27, 2017 3:16 PM, "Sanjeev Kulkarni" <sanjeevrk@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> +1
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Bill Graham <billgraham@gmail.com
> >
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Any other comments on this proposal from Heron developers?
The
> next
> > >>>>> podling
> > >>>>>> report is due on Wednesday so we should address our plan.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 3:38 PM, John D. Ament <
> > >>> johndament@apache.org>
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> If you do in fact want to use gitbox (which allows
you to have
> > >>> github
> > >>>>>>> writable repos), infra will need to be made an admin
on your
> > >>>>> organization
> > >>>>>>> temporarily to do the migration.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Many new projects are doing this, so it's not uncommon
to just
> > >> use
> > >>>>> gitbox
> > >>>>>>> since you're already on github.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> John
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On 2017-10-19 13:20, Brian Hatfield <bmhatfield@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> Thank you both for the info :-) I had not realized
it would
> > >> just
> > >>> be
> > >>>>>>>> re-homed in a different Github org. Thanks!
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Brian
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Bill Graham <
> > >>>> billgraham@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Right, it would still be on github, just at
apache/heron
> > >>> instead
> > >>>> of
> > >>>>>>>>> twitter/heron.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 8:16 AM Jake Farrell
<
> > >>>> jfarrell@apache.org>
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Apache git can also refer to the Github
Apache org as a
> > >>> number
> > >>>> of
> > >>>>>>>>> projects
> > >>>>>>>>>> are running in that fashion. They key is
that the code has
> > >>> been
> > >>>>>>> imported
> > >>>>>>>>>> over to the Apache Infra owned/managed
infrastructure
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> -Jake
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Brian
Hatfield <
> > >>>>>>> bmhatfield@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Silly question - and apologies if this
has already been
> > >>>>> discussed
> > >>>>>> -
> > >>>>>>> but
> > >>>>>>>>> is
> > >>>>>>>>>>> #3 (Migrate the code to Apache git)
required? From my
> > >>>>> perspective
> > >>>>>>> Github
> > >>>>>>>>>>> is
> > >>>>>>>>>>> much more preferable as it's where
nearly every other open
> > >>>>> source
> > >>>>>>>>> codebase
> > >>>>>>>>>>> I interact with is, and the UI is very
friendly to
> > >>> newcomers.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Bill
Graham <
> > >>>>>> billgraham@gmail.com
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> In LEGAL-339 <
> > >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-339
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> it was
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> concluded that we can in fact move
the code to Apache
> > >> git
> > >>>> and
> > >>>>>> cut
> > >>>>>>>>> Apache
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> releases without the SGA. I propose
we move forward on
> > >>>> that. I
> > >>>>>>> suggest
> > >>>>>>>>>>> the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> following plan:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.a Refactor all Heron build dependencies
(mainly c++
> > >>> libs)
> > >>>> to
> > >>>>>> be
> > >>>>>>>>>>> fetched
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> at build time and not committed
in the repo. (#2092
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/twitter/heron/issues/2092>)
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.b Refactor the bazel checkstyles
to support both the
> > >>>> Twitter
> > >>>>>>>>> copyright
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> (for existing code) and the Apache
copyright (for new
> > >> code
> > >>>>> after
> > >>>>>>> the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> migration).
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Cut the last non-Apache release.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Migrate the code to Apache git
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Add incubation disclaimer
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> 5. Cut the first Apache release.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> What do folks think of that plan?
Item's 1a and 1b can
> > >>>> happen
> > >>>>> in
> > >>>>>>>>>>> parallel,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> as could item 2 actually. There
will surely be more
> > >>> smaller
> > >>>>>>> items, but
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> those are the big ones as I see
it. Please chime in if
> > >>> I've
> > >>>>>>> overlooked
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> anything major.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> thanks,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Bill
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Sent from Gmail Mobile
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> >
>

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