ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Павлухин Иван <vololo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Ignite Modularization
Date Tue, 02 Jul 2019 08:24:47 GMT
Denis,

> I think this should be optional. Do you think we need to do it in the first instance

In my opinion we should at least have a solid understanding of the
subject. I think it worth having a separate discussion regarding Java
9 modules. Today java modular subsystem seems to be not widely adopted
yet. And many Java library developers are satisfied delivering their
jars to be used as automatic modules. I think that today Java 8 is the
most widely used version. But the situation can change soon and we
should keep our eyes peeled.

вт, 2 июл. 2019 г. в 00:39, Denis Magda <dmagda@apache.org>:
>
> Hi Ivan,
>
> Thanks for looking into this.
>
> 1. I did not get from IEP whether Thin Clients have a separate
> > repository and a release lifecycle or not.
>
>
> Sorry for the confusion. Yes, such clients have to be in separate repos and
> might have their own lifecycles. Updated the wiki.
>
>
> > 2. Are we going to exclude tests for unsupported modules from Ignite
> > TeamCity?
>
>
> Yes, that's my thinking, an unsupported integration won't be part of Ignite
> modular ecosystem and won't be tested by the community. Any objections?
>
>
> > 3. Will we adress implementing Java 9+ modules during that process?
>
>
> I think this should be optional. Do you think we need to do it in the
> first instance?
>
> -
> Denis
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 10:45 PM Павлухин Иван <vololo100@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> > Hi Denis,
> >
> > I fully support the idea. Could you please clarify on following points:
> > 1. I did not get from IEP whether Thin Clients have a separate
> > repository and a release lifecycle or not.
> > 2. Are we going to exclude tests for unsupported modules from Ignite
> > TeamCity?
> > 3. Will we adress implementing Java 9+ modules during that process?
> >
> > чт, 27 июн. 2019 г. в 18:11, Denis Magda <dmagda@apache.org>:
> > >
> > > Ignite developers and users,
> > >
> > > I'd like us to consider Ignite modularization as part of Ignite 3.0
> > > timeframe. Presently, Ignite codebase mixes both core capabilities with
> > 3rd
> > > party integrations. It leads to the following:
> > >
> > >    - Cumbersome and continuously growing codebase with many 3rd-party
> > >    dependencies.
> > >    - Some of the integrations are questionable and should no longer be
> > >    supported by the community at all.
> > >    - Integrations evolution is bound to Ignite release cycles even though
> > >    no changes are needed in the core.
> > >    - Ignite community has to support everything (test, release, fix,
> > >    continue development) which requires to have particular integration
> > experts
> > >    on a permanent basis - doesn't work.
> > >
> > > Here is an IEP:
> > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-36%3A+Modularization
> > >
> > > Please review it, share feedback. Pay attention to the list of
> > integrations
> > > that should no longer be supported by the community.
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > Denis
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Ivan Pavlukhin
> >



-- 
Best regards,
Ivan Pavlukhin

Mime
View raw message