+1 On Nov 14, 2014 11:18 AM, "Keith Turner" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Corey Nolet <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Josh, > > > > > My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes > > moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. > > > > You do have a good point. My hope was that this could be the beginning of > > our changing history so that we could begin to encourage the community to > > contribute their own source directly and give them an outlet for doing > so. > > I understand that's also the intent of hosting open source repos under > ASF > > to begin with- so I'm partial to either outcome. > > > > > I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had > > mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally > > (more "how do I do X" examples) and internally (keep devs honest about > how > > our APIs are implemented). > > > > I would think that would just require keeping the repos up to date as > > versions change so they wouldn't get out of date and possibly releasing > > them w/ our other releases. > > > > > > Wherever they end up living, thank you Adam for the contributions! > > > > I'll 2nd that. > > For the following reasons, I think it might be nice to move existing > examples out of core into their own git repo(s). > > * Examples would be based on released version of Accumulo > * Examples could easily be built w/o building all of Accumulo > * As Sean said, this would keep us honest > * The examples poms would serve as examples more than they do when part of > Accumulo build > * Less likely to use non public APIs in examples > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes > > > moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. I think > there's > > > precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next > > to > > > examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more "how do I > do > > > X" examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are > > > implemented). > > > > > > Bringing the examples into the core also encourages us to grow the > > > community which has been stagnant with respect to new committers for > > about > > > 9 months now. > > > > > > > > > Corey Nolet wrote: > > > > > >> +1 for adding the examples to contrib. > > >> > > >> I was, myself, reading over this email wondering how a set of 11 > > separate > > >> examples on the use of Accumulo would fit into the core codebase- > > >> especially as more are contributed over tinme. I like the idea of > giving > > >> community members an outlet for contributing examples that they've > built > > >> so > > >> that we can continue to foster that without having to fit them in the > > core > > >> codebase. It just seems more maintainable. > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Josh Elser<[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of > "substantial". > > >>> Thanks. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Mike Drob wrote: > > >>> > > >>> The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples. It's > clearly > > >>>> non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered "substantial" > > >>>> > > >>>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elser<[email protected]> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Sean Busbey wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser< > [email protected]> > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Personally, I didn't really think that this contribution was in > > the > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> spirit > > >>>>>>> of what the new codebase adoption guidelines were meant to cover. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Some extra examples which leverage what Accumulo already does > seems > > >>>>>>> more > > >>>>>>> like improvements for new Accumulo users than anything else. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> It's content developed out side of the project list. That's > all > > it > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> takes to > > >>>>>> require the trip through the Incubator checks as far as the ASF > > >>>>>> guidelines > > >>>>>> are concerned. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> From http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> """ > > >>>>> From time to time, an external codebase is brought into the ASF > > that > > >>>>> is > > >>>>> not a separate incubating project but still represents a > substantial > > >>>>> contribution that was not developed within the ASF's source control > > >>>>> system > > >>>>> and on our public mailing lists. > > >>>>> """ > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Not to look a gift-horse in the mouth (it is great work), but I > don't > > >>>>> see > > >>>>> these examples as "substantial". I haven't found guidelines yet > that > > >>>>> better > > >>>>> clarify the definition of "substantial". > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >> > > >
