Quick question - geotools is a runtime dependency? Are you shipping the source code? If not, you should be okay.
Sent from my iPhone, Venkatesh > On Oct 6, 2016, at 7:52 AM, Puja Valiyil <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi everyone, > Talking with Aaron, it seems like there were two paths forward for > refactoring in order to create a release. To refresh everyone's memory, > the issue was that the geo-indexing extensions to Rya pull in geotools, > which prohibits us from releasing Rya under an Apache 2 license. There may > be some more particulars that I'm glossing over -- someone please chime in > if they feel it is key to the discussion. > The two paths forward we had were: > 1. Make all of the indexing project and its downstream dependencies > optional and exclude them from a release > -- The indexing project includes several "optional" extensions to Rya > (advanced indexing strategies). Prior to Rya becoming an apache project, > these indexing extensions were optional and there was a separate profile > for including them. This option involves reverting back to that mindset. > The main argument against this is that these indexing strategies/extensions > are not in fact optional but are "core" to Rya and can't be excluded. > > 2. Refactor Rya to pull geoindexing into a separate project and exclude > that project from the release. > - We could refactor Rya to have geoindexing be its own project and add a > profile to include that in the build. This would invovle moving the class > mvm.rya.indexing.GeoIndexer and packages mem.rya.indexing.accumulo.geo and > mvm.rya.indexing.mongodb.geo to a separate project and then removing/moving > references to geoindexing anywhere else. Another option is to refactor the > GeoIndexer interface to remove the geotools dependency. > > I think #1 is a good immediate path for a release and that #2 is a good > longer term path forward. Since it's probably in our best interests as a > community to get an apache release sooner rather than later, I'd rather us > go with #1 since it would quicker. I also think that most users of Rya > would be ok with excluding the indexing project since it is not core > functionality for Rya. While #2 is a better long term plan, it involves > some pretty extensive refactoring that would be difficult to do well in a > timely manner. > > Any thoughts?
