Hi, I'm +1 for - merging the batch API modules - having streaming top-level when the contributors think it's ready
I have a question though. Why did the streaming Scala API into the batch Scala API module? Are there dependency (or other) problems or could it be moved to the other streaming modules? Since there are no concrete plans (that I'm aware of) to do the refactoring soon, I would avoid to have the streaming and batch APIs mixed if there's not a good reason for that. Cheers, Fabian 2014-12-28 9:59 GMT+01:00 Chiwan Park <chiwanp...@icloud.com>: > 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 > >>> > >>> > >> > >
