I'm +1 for a top level sandbox repo. Anyone should be able create a project in that.
Once the project graduates out of the sandbox we should create a top level On Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 11:30 AM Anshum Gupta <ans...@anshumgupta.net> wrote: > Building this as a branch is an option, but building it outside in a > personal repo is exactly what's not the Apache Way. > > Code should be designed and built in the Apache world, else it'd be a > grant/donation and not really a PR. Also, you can't create a PR against a > repo that doesn't exist upstream. > > Do you have an objection against a mono-repo i.e. solr-sandbox too? That > would open the door for us to use this for similar purposes in the future, > until the code is ready to be released. > > Also, just to reiterate, creating a repo doesn't cost anything and we > aren't releasing anything. This is a placeholder to put the code in. If it > works out well, we can release it or iterate on the code/implementation. In > any case, it would have zero impact on the project itself. > > -Anshum > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 3:37 PM Noble Paul <noble.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I feel this is placing the cart before the horse. >> >> We can always build this as a branch or a repo under your own account. >> Once we reach a point where the project is reasonably mature, you can >> create a repo and contribute it upstream. >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 6:27 AM Anshum Gupta <ans...@anshumgupta.net> >> wrote: >> > >> > I understand what you are saying, which is also my reason to not have a >> mono-repo. This way it's easier to manage and drop a repository when it's >> not needed. It doesn't cause clutter and lives in isolation. >> > >> > I think we are on the same page in terms of the intention. >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 10:51 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < >> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> Look at the branches that are cluttering up our main repository, many >> symbolic of unfinished work. If we start one repo each for everything we >> hope to finish, we'll make Solr annoying in a new way. >> >> >> >> There is no reason multiple artifacts can't be released independently >> from the same repo. Why are you opposed to that idea, Anshum? >> >> >> >> On Tue, 12 Jan, 2021, 11:53 pm Anshum Gupta, <ans...@anshumgupta.net> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Thank you everyone! >> >>> >> >>> I'll move forward with the cross-dc repo creation then as mentioned >> in the original email :) >> >>> >> >>> If we want to change the approach on the repo, we can always change >> that before we release anything in the future. >> >>> >> >>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 10:32 AM Mike Drob <md...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> I'm seeing valid reasons to prefer one solr sandbox repo, or prefer >> multiple many repos for future plugins or integrations. In this specific >> case, I think the relevant deciding points are 1) we don't have multiple >> things yet, so deciding between a "mono-repo" and a "multi-repo" is not >> very consequential 2) we can always rename things later 3) in the absence >> of a strong reason otherwise i'll defer to the people doing the work (in >> this case, Anshum). We considered sandbox and can always create one in the >> future. If Anshum feels that solr-cross-dc is better for now than I'm fine >> with that too. >> >>>> >> >>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 5:07 PM David Smiley <dsmi...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> (palm-to-face) -- LOL okay sorry. I'm getting my threads crossed. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> A repo which holds multiple independent modules that can work with >> Solr need not release them all at once. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ~ David Smiley >> >>>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer >> >>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2021 at 4:48 PM Anshum Gupta <ans...@anshumgupta.net> >> wrote: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> David, this is about the Cross DC work that was supposed to be >> done :-) >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> The independent release cadence is primarily the reason why a new >> repo makes sense to me in this case. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2021 at 1:24 PM David Smiley <dsmi...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> While I like the idea of a single (Apache!) repo for multiple >> packages/plugins, that does not apply to the Solr Operator, which isn't >> even in Java. It's too unique. So I agree with Anshum & others about >> creating an Apache repo for the Solr Operator. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> I think the ship has sailed on the Solr Operator being an Apache >> project instead of some committer's pet project. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> ~ David Smiley >> >>>>>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer >> >>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 4:47 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < >> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Not necessarily. Most people contribute to Apache Lucene/Solr >> using external repositories (forks) and raise pull requests against Apache >> owned repositories. There's no SGA needed on such occasions. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> I see two paths forward from here. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> a) Lets setup a single repository for all packages/plugins, say >> lucene-solr-extras or lucene-solr-contribs or lucene-solr-sandbox etc., and >> develop it there. >> >>>>>>>> b) All development for this effort happens in an external >> repository (https://github.com/apple/solr-dc or >> https://github.com/anshumg/solr-dc) and we raise a PR against Apache >> owned repository (which can be created if needed once we are all onboard). >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> What does everyone else think? >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 10:23 AM Mike Drob <md...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> An external repository probably ends up requiring a software >> grant? I know there is a material difference between code originating >> externally and code originating within the umbrella of the ASF in terms of >> IP, copyright, or other legal status. >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 8:11 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < >> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> If all we need now is a place to commit a PoC for now (and >> something like sandbox repo or contribs won't suffice), why can't we have a >> separate repository in GitHub outside Apache and merge into an Apache >> repository only once the code takes reasonable shape? >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 8 Jan, 2021, 2:31 am Anshum Gupta, < >> ans...@anshumgupta.net> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> 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 >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> -- >> >>>>>> Anshum Gupta >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Anshum Gupta >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Anshum Gupta >> >> >> >> -- >> ----------------------------------------------------- >> Noble Paul >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> >> > > -- > Anshum Gupta >
