Thanks for the feedback, Mike. I like the idea of the sandbox, but that might be restricting when we want to work on more than one repos.
I'm not sure if that would happen in the near future, but as we can always discard the repo and it doesn't really come at a cost, I don't see a problem with having a repo created for this specific reason. On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 12:45 PM Mike Drob <md...@apache.org> wrote: > I'm not sure where I sit on this, going to start typing things and then > hopefully I'll reach a conclusion by the end. > > This definitely needs to be outside of the core solr repo so that it can > be versioned and released independently. And I disagree with Ishan about > the consequence of abandoning the repository - if we realize that it's a > bad direction then we can pivot, but we shouldn't let a fear of the unknown > stop us from doing it in the first place. > > However, if all we need right now is a place to commit code that is WIP, > then what we really want is a sandbox to play with, and not necessarily a > strongly directed repo. Lucene has a sandbox in the main code. We could > similarly start this under Solr contrib and move it out before an actual > release of 9x happens. Or maybe we start with a [lucene-]solr-sandbox > repository that we can throw all sorts of stuff into and then when > components are mature enough they get to graduate into their own repo? > > Mike > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 2:32 PM Anshum Gupta <ans...@anshumgupta.net> > wrote: > >> I understand your concern, but this is the placeholder for where the code >> would be, not what the code would look like. >> >> Considering we agreed to do this in a repository outside of the core, I >> believe this is a good place to start. The idea that the release cadence >> for the cross-dc effort should be different from that of core is an >> argument in favor of this approach, but I'm happy to talk more about it. >> I just thought that based on the original email, folks were on-board with >> the idea of this being outside of core Solr artifact/release. >> >> On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 11:06 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < >> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> -1 on this. Without finalizing on the shape of how the solution will >>> look like, I don't think we should start a repository: it would be bad if >>> we have to abandon the repository of our approach changes (say we want to >>> keep it tightly integrated inside Solr). >>> >>> On Thu, 7 Jan, 2021, 11:45 pm Anshum Gupta, <ans...@anshumgupta.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi everyone, >>>> >>>> Inline with my earlier email, I'll be requesting a new repository to >>>> host the cross-dc work. Please let me know if you have any questions or >>>> concerns. >>>> >>>> *Repository name: *solr-crossdc >>>> *Generated name:* lucene-solr-crossdc.git (that's auto-generated, so >>>> can't remove the TLP prefix) >>>> *Commit notification list:* commits-cros...@lucene.apache.org (I think >>>> it makes sense for these commit notifications to go to a new list, but I'm >>>> open to reusing the old one) >>>> *GitHub notification list:* dev@lucene.apache.org >>>> >>>> I'll be submitting a request for the same later in the day today if >>>> there are no concerns. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Anshum Gupta >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> Anshum Gupta >> > -- Anshum Gupta
