Thx for the feedback guys. I've just pushed oauth and digitalocean2 to jclouds-labs and removed the oauth folder from jclouds-labs-google in 1.9.x.
Before doing that I've checked how our Jenkins builds are configured, and jclouds-labs-google is already started as a downstream job of the jclouds-labs build, so there is nothing to change there. This also means that the impact of the oauth api move will be very very minimal (if any) as our release scripts and builds already assume that order, and end-users mostly use the dependencies from Maven Central. In any case, this shouldn't condition the discussion about 2.0.0, and given the comment in this thread I think it would be good that we start planning it in the ML. I. On 1 July 2015 at 01:16, Chris Custine <chris.cust...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm +1 for moving consolidating oauth to jclouds-labs and releasing it from > there in 1.9.1. > > -- > Chris Custine > > >> Ignasi Barrera <mailto:n...@apache.org> >> June 27, 2015 at 4:04 PM >> >> Hi! >> >> We're about to open PRs to merge the DigitalOcean v2 provider. Since >> the v1 version will no longer be available starting on November [1] >> (and is the only one we support now), I think we should include the v2 >> provider in 1.9.1. This will give users enough time to migrate and >> test the new API (there are no breaking changes in it) before it is >> shut down. >> >> Before doing that, we have to agree how to proceed with its OAuth >> dependency. DigitalOcean v2 depends on the OAuth API, which was >> promoted to the main repo but only in 2.0.0, to avoid a groupId >> change; in 1.9.x the oauth home is in the jclouds-labs-google repo. >> This gives us the following options: >> >> * Merge the digitalocean2 provider in jclouds-labs, and change the >> "build order". jclouds-labs-google will have to be built before >> jclouds-labs. >> * Move the oauth api to jclouds-labs, and then merge digitalocean2 >> there. This implies that jclouds-labs-google will need to be built >> after jclouds-labs, but that's what we are already doing implicitly. >> >> The main issue here is that we are introducing a dependency between >> labs repos we don't have now, but I think that having the DO v2 >> provider in 1.9.1 is worth it. >> >> WDYT? >> >> if there is an agreement to proceed, I'd vote for option 2 (move oauth >> then merge the provider). >> >> Take into account that there are no references to 'google' in ithe >> OAuth api; it is just hosted in the labs-google repo. This means most >> users won't be affected, as the Maven coordinates won't change. >> >> >> I. >> >> >> >> >> [1] >> https://developers.digitalocean.com/documentation/changelog/api-v1/sunsetting-api-v1/ > >
