Hmmm … well guess I’ll re-do my changes again then and split up the examples.
Next time it would be less of a waste of time if people would have responded to my questions quicker. I mean … I gave everyone 5 full days and got nothing. Will do a second round of the iotdb part … the already split repo will be easy, but I don’t want to copy stuff back cause then we loose the commit history whithuot any necessity. So, I’ll replay my changes. Chris Von: Haonan Hou <[email protected]> Datum: Donnerstag, 18. April 2024 um 05:29 An: [email protected] <[email protected]> Betreff: Re: 答复: Splitting up the repos +1 Haonan On 2024/04/17 08:46:16 Wang Critas wrote: > The examples could be classified into two parts > (1) Connector example: flink, hadoop, kafka, pulsar, rabiitmq, rocketmq > (2) IoTDB native api example: jdbc, mqtt, pipe, rest, schema, session, > trigger, udf > > For (1), we could move into extra repo. > For (2) , they should be retained in the IoTDB repo. > > Jialin Qiao > > > Hi > > if we were to vote on this (which we can) I would vote +1 on ‘ The examples > could be classified into two parts ' > > Voting will be open for 72hr. > A minimum of 3 binding +1 votes and more binding +1 than binding -1 > are required to pass. > You can achieve the above by following [4]. > [ ] +1 accept > [ ] -1 reject (explanation required) > > Xuan > > 发件人: Christofer Dutz <[email protected]> > 日期: 星期三, 2024年4月17日 16:38 > 收件人: [email protected] <[email protected]> > 主题: AW: Splitting up the repos > We however still need this to be decided. > > Currently we have something such as one binding vote for keeping the examples > together and one for splitting it up. > I have no objections to splitting it up, but we need to do things the Apache > way here … > > Otherwise this would imply that there are votes that count more than others > and we need to make sure this impression is not made. > > Chris > > > Von: Wang Critas <[email protected]> > Datum: Mittwoch, 17. April 2024 um 10:20 > An: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Betreff: 答复: Splitting up the repos > In here > https://github.com/apache/iotdb-extras/pull/6<https://github.com/apache/iotdb-extras/pull/6><https://github.com/apache/iotdb-extras/pull/6%3chttps:/github.com/apache/iotdb-extras/pull/6%3e> > > 发件人: Christofer Dutz <[email protected]> > 日期: 星期一, 2024年4月15日 21:01 > 收件人: [email protected] <[email protected]> > 主题: AW: Splitting up the repos > Well, > > as I said … I’ve already done the work of splitting things up (I had waited 5 > days for any comments here) > > If we would now do it differently, I am sure someone would be able to re-do > the split based on my work and then simply delete the double examples from > the extras repo. > > So, I would be voting for moving all examples to the extras, you for > splitting the examples, guess we need at least a third vote (with hopefully > not a 3rd opinion ;-) ) > > Chris > > > Von: Jialin Qiao <[email protected]> > Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 14:38 > An: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos > Hi, > > The examples could be classified into two parts > (1) Connector example: flink, hadoop, kafka, pulsar, rabiitmq, rocketmq > (2) IoTDB native api example: jdbc, mqtt, pipe, rest, schema, session, > trigger, udf > > For (1), we could move into extra repo. > For (2) , they should be retained in the IoTDB repo. > > Jialin Qiao > > Christofer Dutz <[email protected]> 于2024年4月15日周一 17:56写道： > > > > Hmpf, > > > > a little bit sooner reply would have been good … I’m already done with the > > changes, also with moving all examples and the parts of the distribution > > bundling the connectors. > > > > I do think also moving the examples is a good idea. Usually, examples pull > > in all sorts of dependencies, which show up on vulnerability reports. Also > > do we have some examples that refer to stuff we now moved out of the main > > repo, we’d be getting a cyclic dependency from that, so we would have to > > split up the examples in that case. > > > > So, if we were to vote on this (which we can) I would vote +1 on moving all > > examples out of the main repo. > > > > Chris > > > > > > Von: Jialin Qiao <[email protected]> > > Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 11:20 > > An: [email protected] <[email protected]> > > Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos > > Hi, > > > > 1. Which Parts: Only iotdb-connector need to be moved, distribution > > and examples will impact the release and users. > > 2. How to split up: I prefer【Simply ignore the history, copy the > > files to the new repo and delete them from the old】. > > > > Jialin Qiao > > > > Christofer Dutz <[email protected]> 于2024年4月15日周一 16:27写道： > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > So, I’ve set a tag on the main repository “before-moving-extras” > > > (https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras<https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras<https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras%3chttps:/github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras<https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras<https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras%3chttps:/github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras%3chttps:/github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras%3chttps:/github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras%3chttps:/github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras>>>>) > > > > > > Also have I copied the content of the examples and integration modules to > > > the new repo, duplicated the build there and updated the versions to > > > artifacts in the main repo to reference a variable. > > > > > > The build in the extras seems to work, now I’ll have to strip out > > > configurations, dependency management etc. for stuff that’s not needed in > > > the extras and do the same in the main repo. > > > > > > > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > Von: Christofer Dutz <[email protected]> > > > Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 09:22 > > > An: [email protected] <[email protected]> > > > Betreff: AW: Splitting up the repos > > > Ok … > > > > > > So, no comment I will simply treat as lazy consensus, therefore I will > > > move forward with tagging the main repo with the latest changes as last > > > revision before the split and reference that in the commit to the new > > > repo. > > > Then I’ll simply copy over the files and delete them from the main repo. > > > > > > As with other projects however, I really dislike this form of workting > > > together. Defaulting back to lazy consensus costs a lot of valuable time > > > as I have to wait a reasonable amount of time. If I had gotten any “sure > > > … I’m fine with you doing X” I could have long finished this. > > > > > > In the future it would be a lot better, if some people would actually > > > reply. > > > > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > Von: Christofer Dutz <[email protected]> > > > Datum: Donnerstag, 11. April 2024 um 10:36 > > > An: [email protected] <[email protected]> > > > Betreff: Splitting up the repos > > > Hi all, > > > > > > so now that the new repo is created > > > (https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/iotdb-extras.git, but please don’t > > > push anything there just yet), we would need to decide on which parts > > > should be moved there. > > > > > > > > > * “distribution”: Here I think we need to split the distribution. > > > Keeping the distributions containing only core in the main repo and > > > adding a new distribution module in the extras repo, that contains the > > > downstream components. > > > * “example” (which I would propose to rename to examples as it > > > contains multiple) > > > * “iotdb-connector” > > > > > > > > > As it seems that in the integration-tests there are no tests testing the > > > connectors, I guess we can leave that as it is. > > > > > > Now the problem is: There are multiple options to split up the repo and > > > keeping the entire history. > > > > > > 1. Split out one directory in a separate branch and then merge all > > > branches into an empty new one > > > 2. Use the filter plugin to strip out all commits that match a regexp > > > 3. Simply ignore the history, copy the files to the new repo and > > > delete them from the old. > > > > > > 3 is the simples, but the person doing the move will be marked as author. > > > In general this is not that problematic, as the integration modules and > > > the examples are usually not that complex, but I would understand, if > > > people wanted to keep the history. > > > > > > Option 1 is probably the most work, but the most robust option, as with > > > option 2, I had to give up when doing the PLC4X split as there were bugs > > > and issues in the tooling. > > > > > > So, if nobody objects and we’ve decided on what should be moved, I > > > personally would opt for option 3. > > > > > > Chris >
