When we collapse the solr/solr structure I hope we can keep the number of 
top-level folders in git to a minimum. There are too many already, so adding 
all contribs don’t help.

I hope the cobtribs will be converted to 1st party packages soon, so perhaps 
“plugins” or “packages” is a good top level folder name?

Those that are not yet converted can stay in “contribs”? 

Can we make solr-exporter a separate git repo? With separate artifacts and 
separate docker image. Don’t know if that means it must also be a full sub 
project?

Jan Høydahl

> 11. jun. 2021 kl. 22:46 skrev David Smiley <[email protected]>:
> 
> 
> We (all?) agree to do away with "contrib" :-). 
> I think a folder grouping the modules (that which can plug inside Solr) is 
> useful as there are a number of them -- as such this is a nice organization 
> IMO.  There's a bunch of other stuff at the top level and I'd rather not 
> intermix all our modules at this layer.
> 
> ~ David Smiley
> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
> 
> 
>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 4:41 PM Mike Drob <[email protected]> wrote:
>> We can have modules, but why do they need to be in an additional folder 
>> deep? Why not just have langid next to solrj and core? Contrib to me 
>> connotes experimental or unsupported, which these things are decidedly not. 
>> 
>>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 2:59 PM David Smiley <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> The contrib folder is just a folder of modules -- optional plugins for 
>>> solr-core.  IMO we should simply rename "contrib" to "modules".  I think 
>>> the only non-module in there is the prometheus exporter which could move 
>>> out.  Mike, I'm not sure if you have a different notion of what "module" 
>>> is?  I believe most of us would be happy to move away from "contrib" 
>>> wording, anyway.
>>> 
>>> ~ David Smiley
>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 3:03 PM Mike Drob <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> I think related to this, I would like to see some "contibs" moved out
>>>> from the contrib folder and into proper modules. Right now the
>>>> definition of contrib seems to be anything that isn't core or solrj,
>>>> but maybe there is room for a backup module that has gcs and s3 and
>>>> hdfs all under it. LangId is already mentioned in our ref guide but we
>>>> pretend like it is always present and don't think of it as a contrib.
>>>> We kind of think of contrib as optional extra stuff, so maybe we call
>>>> the things what they are - plugins and extensions? Then we don't have
>>>> to think as hard about why certain things are showing up in which lib
>>>> folders.
>>>> 
>>>> Also, minor benefit, I would then be able to type c<tab> instead of
>>>> having to type cor<tab> to disambiguate from con<tab> in my terminal.
>>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 8:09 AM David Smiley <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > I believe we can do a fair amount of re-organization pertaining to Jetty 
>>>> > without losing the Jetty configuration that I think is valuable to users 
>>>> > who want to tweak something.
>>>> >
>>>> > ~ David Smiley
>>>> > Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>>>> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 8:01 AM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> 
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> +1 to a cleanup here for 9.0. As clean and neat organization as 
>>>> >> possible. Perhaps rename "dist" -> "lib"?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I wish we could get rid of the server (jetty) folder altogether, and 
>>>> >> move everything from server/solr-webapp/webapp/WEB-INF/lib to 
>>>> >> "lib/deps/". But that ties into custom boot-class, getting rid of 
>>>> >> web.xml and building Jetty context in Java code.. I'm willing to help 
>>>> >> here if others also want to go this direction. This would further hide 
>>>> >> Jetty as an impl detail and let us organize stuff more freely.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Jan
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 11. jun. 2021 kl. 13:29 skrev David Smiley <[email protected]>:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Bumping this conversation up, based on recent communication.  I have 
>>>> >> yet to take action but really any of us can.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> ~ David Smiley
>>>> >> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>>>> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 8:48 AM David Smiley <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> I'll proceed on this with lazy consensus.  I suspect most of us don't 
>>>> >>> care, unsurprisingly since I doubt anyone has any fondness for the 
>>>> >>> "dist" folder.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> ~ David Smiley
>>>> >>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>>>> >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 7:31 AM Erick Erickson 
>>>> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Well, Solr has grown “organically” so some things just _are_, like 
>>>> >>>> sunrises and plagues ;)
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> On a serious note, AFAIC rearrange as you see fit. I wonder how much 
>>>> >>>> of this is left over from the war days? Anything that’s lasted 
>>>> >>>> through all the transformations Solr has is bound to need cleaning up 
>>>> >>>> betimes.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> How would it relate to splitting Solr off into its own TLP? On the 
>>>> >>>> surface, I’d guess the two efforts would be orthogonal, I mention it 
>>>> >>>> just in case rearranging the layout would make that task easier or 
>>>> >>>> harder...
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> > On Nov 15, 2020, at 12:18 AM, David Smiley <[email protected]> 
>>>> >>>> > wrote:
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> > I've been doing a bit of dependency work in one of our contribs, 
>>>> >>>> > and observing more closely than usual exactly what we produce in 
>>>> >>>> > the distribution layout (result of gradlew assemble).  There are 
>>>> >>>> > some tricks Dawid did in gradle/solr/packaging.gradle to pull off 
>>>> >>>> > this stunt to keep things as they have been for many years.  The 
>>>> >>>> > distribution layout is awkward, I think.  We produce this "dist" 
>>>> >>>> > folder at the top level that has every JAR this project produces, 
>>>> >>>> > *even contribs*.  But why?  I think contribs should keep to 
>>>> >>>> > themselves.  It's ridiculous that /contribs/ltr/ is empty except 
>>>> >>>> > for a README.txt... IMO it ought to have the JAR in a "lib" 
>>>> >>>> > subdirectory there mixed with its dependencies (LTR has none but 
>>>> >>>> > others sure do).  Today, each contrib's JAR is in "/dist".  And 
>>>> >>>> > what about SolrJ?  I think SolrJ is important enough that it 
>>>> >>>> > deserves its very own top-level directory "solrj", and like the 
>>>> >>>> > contribs, with a "lib" alongside it.  Maybe Solrj's optional 
>>>> >>>> > dependencies could be in a lib-optional dir next to it or lib/opt/ 
>>>> >>>> > (beneath it).  Then... we don't need "dist" at all.  It contains 
>>>> >>>> > the solr-core JAR but this is redundant.  Furthermore, the server 
>>>> >>>> > webapp could be configured to add the SolrJ libs so that we don't 
>>>> >>>> > need to redundantly put any of them in the distribution.  There 
>>>> >>>> > might be some duplicated jars overall, but not many.  Logging libs 
>>>> >>>> > might be explicitly excluded so that they are only in one spot.  
>>>> >>>> > (Logging in Java is a mess)
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> > WDYT?
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> > ~ David Smiley
>>>> >>>> > Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>>>> >>>> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>
>>>> 
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>> 

Reply via email to