Good point Dan: if sdk-java-extension component actually contains only
IO related, why not rename it (it could be easier for users ;)).
Regards
JB
On 03/21/2016 06:04 PM, Dan Halperin wrote:
I currently only own "sdk-java-gcp", which does not give me great
visibility into the bugs that are not Google Cloud-specific. I would like
to see more of the IO-related issues earlier, so in that sense it makes
sense to me to have a broader IO component.
I looked at "sdk-java-extensions" and everything in there right now is IO.
Maybe we should rename -extensions to -io and then rename sdk-java-gcp to
sdk-java-io-gcp?
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Frances Perry <[email protected]> wrote:
The original plan was that IOs would just be in the library extensions
(e.g. sdk-java-extensions). It'd fine to subdivide that further if needed,
but maybe we should wait until it gets a bit bigger? Dan, what do you
think, as component owner?
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:33 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi beamers !
I started to work on the directories re-organization, and especially, I'm
moving the different IOs in their own folder.
As we can bet on contribution on IO, maybe it would make sense to create
the IO component in Jira.
Thoughts ?
Regards
JB
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
