I'm glad I came up with the same idea twice. Before I dive too deeply into this, does anyone else agree or object?
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Bill Farner <[email protected]> wrote: > I believe this came up in a previous conversation, with the same > conclusion you have drawn. Ticket: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1213 > > > > _____________________________ > From: Zameer Manji <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2015 12:20 PM > Subject: Forking twitter-commons into our tree > To: <[email protected]> > > > Hey, > > Aurora depends heavily on twitter-commons for lots of functionality. > However upstream is not very active and I suspect that it will be less > active in the future. Currently we depend on artifacts published from this > project which causes us to depend on older versions of guava and guice. > > As a result, it seems that will be difficult to address tickets like > AURORA-1380 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1380> without > changing something. I propose we fork all of the java portions of > twitter-commons into our tree, remove the parts we don't use and update > guava and guice so we can move forward on this front. > > What are people's thoughts on this? > > -- > Zameer Manji > > -- > Zameer Manji > >
