... and this article went on wire today about log4j
https://blogs.apache.org/logging/entry/moving_on_to_log4j_2

On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Suneel Marthi <[email protected]> wrote:

> 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.
>> >
>>
>
>

Reply via email to