Hey, @Chiwan: Thanks for the reminder. Sure, I'm sorry that I still haven't had the time to merge your PR. @Fabian: The initial idea was that as the scala api is a fairly thin layer on top of the java thus we could have it in one common project. I've put it under flink-streaming-scala after I've seen the reactions. :)
As Stephan suggested to have one common examples directory I have not separated the flink-streaming-examples to java ans scala subprojects. I'm planning to merge #275 this evening. On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@apache.org> wrote: > 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 > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > >
