Hi Yufei
Thanks for the PR (I left one comment in there).
About naming, I think we should use polaris-{version}-bin for clarity.
I will work on LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER for this distribution as it
has to be "merged".
Regards
JB
On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 8:32 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Folk,
> Thanks a lot for the discussion. Here is the PR(
> https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1589) to merge the binary
> distribution while still keeping module polaris-quarkus-admin and
> polaris-quarkus-server separately.
>
> *What’s included in the PR:*
>
> 1. Introduced a new module that combines binary distribution for both
> Admin Tools and Server. Please note that source and jar are still
> separated. Please refer to my original email for the motivation behind this
> change.
> 2. Removed the now-redundant run-scripts module.
> 3. Consolidated the README to reflect the unified binary distribution.
> 4. Standardized the binary distribution package naming to
> polaris-{version}.tgz and polaris-{version}.zip, following common
> conventions used by other projects (e.g., spark-3.5.5-bin-hadoop3.tgz).
>
> *TODOs*:
>
> 1. Consolidate LICENSE and NOTICE files from both Admin Tools and Server.
> 2. Remove the distribution tasks in each of the original modules.
>
> The PR is technically ready, but I plan to wait until the 0.10 release is
> finalized to avoid disrupting the release process.
>
>
> Yufei
>
>
> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 9:31 AM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Other than duplicated downloads for shared jars, the big problem is that
> > the configuration difference between admin tool and server may cause server
> > issues, e.g., the admin tool may bootstrap a realm in a wrong database.
> >
> > Let's move them into the same distribution package first. Then we can
> > consider merging the modules, as we discussed the separation makes the
> > development and release unnecessary cumbersome.
> >
> > Yufei
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 5:57 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks for the clarification, JB!
> >>
> >> Packaging both the server and the admin tool in the same distribution
> >> (archive) is certainly a good idea.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Dmitri.
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:33 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi
> >> >
> >> > We can see two aspects here:
> >> > - the merge of the applications
> >> > - gather applications in one package/distribution (tar.gz/zip)
> >> >
> >> > I'm in favor of the later because:
> >> > - admin and server distributions share 80% of the same artifacts
> >> > - users have to download to "big" packages
> >> >
> >> > We should keep the Quarkus applications separated but we can gather
> >> > both in one distribution, with this kind of layout:
> >> > - admin/run.sh
> >> > - admin/lib/boot
> >> > - admin/lib/main
> >> > - server/run.sh
> >> > - server/lib/boot
> >> > - server/lib/main
> >> > - lib/common
> >> > I don't see why it could not work with Quarkus (I already did
> >> > something similar for other Quarkus application, using maven assembly
> >> > plugin).
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> > JB
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:54 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Hi Yufei,
> >> > >
> >> > > Please note that the admin tool is a CLI application, while the
> >> quarkus
> >> > > "server" is a REST application.
> >> > >
> >> > > How do you envision supporting both CLI and REST API in the same
> >> module?
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > > Dmitri.
> >> > >
> >> > > On Mon, May 5, 2025 at 2:49 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Hi folks,
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I’d like to propose merging the polaris-quarkus-admin and
> >> > > > polaris-quarkus-server modules. While modularization can bring
> >> benefits
> >> > > > like clearer separation of concerns, in this case, the split seems
> >> to
> >> > cause
> >> > > > more friction than value. Here’s why I think merging makes sense:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > 1. Improved usability: Users can find all tools in one place,
> >> > making it
> >> > > > easier to use and onboard. Just try out the new 0.10.0-beta
> >> binary
> >> > > > releases, you will find out the inconvenience of the separation.
> >> > Plus, I
> >> > > > don’t think anyone will use the admin tool without Polaris
> >> server.
> >> > We
> >> > > > don't have to merge the module to archive a single binary release
> >> > > > package,
> >> > > > but merging two modules will make it really easy.
> >> > > > 2. Simpler development: The split has led to small utility
> >> modules
> >> > like
> >> > > > “test-common” and “run-script” that only exist to bridge the
> >> > separation.
> >> > > > Merging the two will reduce duplication and save time for
> >> everyone.
> >> > > > 3. Easier releases: We’d no longer need to generate separate
> >> > > > LICENSE/NOTICE files or maintain two binary packages.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I’ve talked to folks like JB and Prashant about this offline, and
> >> the
> >> > > > feedback so far has been positive.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > If there are no objections, I’ll file a PR to merge the two and aim
> >> to
> >> > > > package them together starting with the 1.0 release.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Yufei
> >> > > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
