On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:57 PM, Mike Drob <[email protected]> wrote:
> Having done this in the past, I have a hard time suggesting this approach. > never tried it. Was there anything else you did not like about it (other than being useless for bisect)? The history would still be in accumulo repo. > As a single module, the code probably won't compile for most of the history > that we preserve, so it's not like we'd be able to efficiently bisect or > take advantage of the history. > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Keith Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > > We can try using git fitler-branch to create the repo and preserve > history. > > > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Since there's an opinion to create an examples repo instead of keeping > > > them in the base project, I'm -0 as long we CI set up so that they > don't > > go > > > silently into the night as I previously state as a concern. > > > > > > Some general questions for actually doing this: do we schedule the move > > of > > > the classes out of the main project for 1.7.0? Will this other repo > > follow > > > the same development practices as the project (e.g. branch names). How > > will > > > we release these examples? > > > > > > Can someone step up to make sure all of the above are > completed/addressed > > > and file the necessary INFRA JIRA issues? > > > > > > > > > David Medinets wrote: > > > > > >> +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". > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >> > > >
