Hello! I agree that refactoring project structure is necessary. But there are some pull requests influenced by this change such as #275 [1], #226 [2]. I think that we would better merge these pull requests before refactoring.
[1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-flink/pull/275 <https://github.com/apache/incubator-flink/pull/275> [2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-flink/pull/226 <https://github.com/apache/incubator-flink/pull/226> — Chiwan Park (Sent with iPhone) > On Dec 28, 2014, at 5:07 AM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > > Marton, > > As far as I understood, this is relevant for the master, not for the 0.8 > release, correct? > > In that case, I suggest to go ahead with the option you voted for (which is > also supported at least by Ufuk and me as well). If we discover downsides, > we will be able to correct this in the course of the next weeks, well > before the next release. > > Greetings, > Stephan > > > On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 8:30 PM, Márton Balassi <mbala...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hey, >> >> Any views on this please? We would like to merge as soon as possible. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Marton >> >> On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Márton Balassi <mbala...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>> During a recent PR of the streaming scala api [1] arose the issue of >>> possibly changing the project structure. For the discussion it seems to >> me >>> that we should address this as a separate issue. Things to note: >>> >>> * According to Stephan for the batch part, there are discussions >>> to combine the "flink-core", "flink-java" projects, possibly also the >>> "flink-scala" project. We are starting to see too many interdependencies. >>> [2] >>> * Streaming is currently under flink-addons, but we are positive that >>> for the next version we can come up with a fairly stable api if needed. >> We >>> would like to have it top level eventually. >>> * Minor issue to keep in mind: Developing our projects with both scala >>> and java nature seems a bit flaky at the moment at least for Eclipse. [3] >>> Proposed solutions are also there, just let us make sure to give new >>> developers a smooth experience with Flink. >>> >>> I personally like the following suggestion: [2] >>> >>> We could, in the next version, go for something like >>> - flink-core (core and batch, java & scala) >>> - flink-streaming (java & scala) >>> - flink-runtime >>> - ... >>> >>> Ufuk also +1'd this. >>> >>> As currently the merge of [1] is blocking further streaming development >>> (it also contains some refactor) I'd like to merge it asap to where it is >>> currently (flink-scala), and let us figure out the project restructure >>> separately. Added a JIRA for the latter. [4] If we choose to restructure >>> the project it will need a commit anyway. >>> >>> [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-flink/pull/275 >>> [2] >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-flink/pull/275#issuecomment-68049822 >>> [3] >>> >> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-flink-dev/201412.mbox/%3CCANC1h_tLtGeOxT-aaA5KR6V4m-Efz8fSN5yKcdX%2B7sjeTdFBEw%40mail.gmail.com%3E >>> [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1340 >>> >>> Please when replying vote and comment on the restructure and merge >>> separately. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Marton >>> >>> >>
