I think we should take this discussion to a separate thread as it is a vote thread. I don't see a need for this change now as there isn't enough justification (such as things are falling apart without this) for the disruption it will cause. My earlier point is that there was a justification when the project started to change the groupid and it is not the same now.
Thanks On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 2:45 PM, Vlad Rozov <vro...@apache.org> wrote: > Do you mean that prior to groupId change nobody was using that groupId or > that nobody was using the library itself :)? If nobody was using the > library, the version 3.x at the beginning of the project is questionable. > > My question is why -1 (veto) as long as things won't fall apart either way. > > Thank you, > > Vlad > > > On 8/22/17 14:09, Pramod Immaneni wrote: > >> The groupId change was done at the beginning of the project about two >> years >> ago before there was an apex release for anyone to use. >> >> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Vlad Rozov <vro...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> I would argue that things won't fall apart in both cases whether >>> artifactId and version are changed or not, so I don't see why it is -1 >>> for >>> the option 2. When groupId was changed from com.datatorrent to >>> org.apache.apex, things have not fall apart :). >>> >>> Thank you, >>> >>> Vlad >>> >>> >>> On 8/22/17 08:31, Pramod Immaneni wrote: >>> >>> +1 for option 1 >>>> -1 for option 2 as I see no impending need to do this now, as in if we >>>> don't do this, things will fall apart. It will be a source of more >>>> disruption and confusion. Malhar has been around for quite some time, >>>> evolving and growing during this period and going to version 4.0 would >>>> be >>>> a >>>> natural progression. Since this is a major version change, there is more >>>> of >>>> a license to relegate things that are deemed unsuitable for production >>>> use >>>> to contrib (an area designated for that purpose), remove deprecated >>>> items, >>>> move things around and possibly even make backwards incompatible >>>> functionality changes so I don't see a need to change the artifact id >>>> and >>>> identity of the project. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 8:16 AM, Munagala Ramanath < >>>> amberar...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>> +1 for option 2 (primary) >>>> >>>>> +1 for option 1 (secondary) >>>>> Ram >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, August 22, 2017, 6:58:46 AM PDT, Vlad Rozov < >>>>> vro...@apache.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> +1 for option 2 (primary) >>>>> +1 for option 1 (secondary) >>>>> >>>>> Thank you, >>>>> >>>>> Vlad >>>>> >>>>> On 8/21/17 23:37, Ananth G wrote: >>>>> >>>>> +1 for option 2 and second vote for option 1 >>>>>> >>>>>> Have we finalized the library name ? Going from Apex-malhar 3.7 to >>>>>> >>>>>> Apex-malhar-1.0 would be counter intuitive. Also it would be great if >>>>> we >>>>> have an agreed process to mark an operator from @evolving to stable >>>>> version >>>>> given we are trying to address this as well as part of the proposal >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>>> Ananth >>>>>> >>>>>> On 22 Aug 2017, at 11:40 am, Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 for option 2 (second vote +1 for option 1) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is to formalize the major version change for Malhar discussed >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1]. >>>>>>> >>>>>> There are two options for major version change. Major version change >>>>>> >>>>>>> will >>>>>>> >>>>>> rename legacy packages to org.apache.apex sub packages while retaining >>>>>> >>>>>>> file >>>>>>> >>>>>> history in git. Other cleanup such as removing deprecated code is also >>>>>> >>>>>>> expected. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1. Version 4.0 as major version change from 3.x >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2. Version 1.0 with simultaneous change of Maven artifact IDs >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please refer to the discussion thread [1] for reasoning behind both >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>> >>>>>> options. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Please vote on both options. Primary vote for your preferred option, >>>>>>>> secondary for the other. Secondary vote can be used when counting >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> primary >>>>>>> >>>>>> vote alone isn't conclusive. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Vote will be open for at least 72 hours. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> Thomas >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> bd1db8a2d01e23b0c0ab98a785f6ee >>>>>>> >>>>>> 9492a1ac9e52d422568a46e5f3@%3Cdev.apex.apache.org%3E >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>> >>>>> Vlad >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thank you, >>> >>> Vlad >>> >>> > > Thank you, > > Vlad >
