Sorry for being a pest today, more questions: 1. Seeing that the project's presently using Log4j for logging. Do we wanna continue with that or shuld we switch to using Sl4j?
2. Regarding the previous discussion about Java 8 being the minimum required JDK, we may have to base that decision on whether Beam project plans to support Java 8 yet or not. The reasoning for that being, I see a bunch of Streaming and Batch integrations on the roadmap here - http://pirk.incubator.apache.org/roadmap/ It may be much more efficient to just integrate with Beam and then delegate to Spark/Flink/Apex./Storm/Heron runners. That way we don't have to code maintenance for different versions of Storm/Spark/Flink etc. and their changing APIs and just focus on Beam. Thoughts? Suneel On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Ellison Anne Williams < [email protected]> wrote: > Agree with Java 8 - we actually talked about doing this before granting the > code... Perhaps we should put a JIRA issue in to this effect. > > There is a 'Coding Standards' section on the 'For Developers' page on the > website (https://pirk.incubator.apache.org/for_developers#coding-standards > ) > -- the standards, style file, etc were largely borrowed from Accumulo, with > some minor modifications. A 'eclipse-pirk-codestyle.xml > <https://github.com/apache/incubator-pirk>' file is provided to format the > code for Eclipse or Intellij. This can certainly be modified if folks > believe that it is best for us to do so. > > I too would prefer not to specify a preferred IDE as that tends to be quite > a personal productivity choice for folks. > > > On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hello > > > > I would recommend at this stage to consider Java 8 as the basis. In > > NiFi our upcoming major release establishes java 8 as the baseline. I > > believe the community went that route because: > > > > - It contains language features that are beneficial and that > > developers wanted to use. > > > > - It can make it easier to accept PRs as you may find contributors > > wanting to use those features so could be important for community > > growth > > > > - Some popular dependency libraries have moved to Java 8 > > > > - Java 7 is EOL (https://java.com/en/download/faq/java_7.xml) > > > > As for coding standards I suspect there are projects that have taken a > > stronger stance on this than we have in NiFi. But, the checkstyle > > configuration we have seems to work out pretty well and is largely > > based on Java standards plus what Accumulo had. So, you might want to > > look around a bit to find a style that works well. > > > > As for preferred IDE - Good luck with that! I'm definitely in favor > > of avoiding having an opinion here. By integrating things like > > checkstyle, using Maven, and using Git then much of the need to have a > > preference is eliminated in my experience. NiFi has have folks using > > Eclipse, IntelliJ (admittedly seems to be the favorite), and Netbeans > > (ok fine i might be the only one). But more importantly this is > > something which is quite personal in terms of developer productivity > > and I think there is value in the community avoiding having a > > preferred IDE. > > > > Thanks > > Joe > > > > On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Suneel Marthi <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I have been looking over the code the past week (mostly me getting > > > familiarized with the project), I did not notice that the coding > > standards > > > are more in line with what Eclipse enforces (which is barely anything). > > > > > > I think all committers should be using IntelliJ for coding, u get an > > Apache > > > committer's license from Jetbrains for the Ultimate edition of > IntelliJ - > > > > > > <goog_1576328420> > > > https://www.jetbrains.com/shop/eform/apache?product=ALL > > > > > > The coding standards are pretty standard across most Apache Java > > projects - > > > we could follow NiFi on this. > > > > > > Also what would be the minimal supported JDK for Pirk ? We shuld > baseline > > > at Java >= 7 IMO. > > >
