[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SQOOP-1870?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14240567#comment-14240567
]
Jarek Jarcec Cecho commented on SQOOP-1870:
-------------------------------------------
Could you summarize and a bit formalize the suggestion then [~vybs]? Would be
interesting to see what is the intended contract (and users) of each of the
{{connector-sdk}}, {{sqoop-spi}} and {{connector-utils}} package (e.g what
classes would go there, what other internal packages would be depending on
those modules, ...).
> IDF API and impementation package depednency
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SQOOP-1870
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SQOOP-1870
> Project: Sqoop
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: sqoop2-framework
> Reporter: Veena Basavaraj
> Assignee: Veena Basavaraj
> Fix For: 1.99.5
>
>
> Currently the IDF API is in connector SDK package,
> The right place for IDF API is sqoop-spi package since custom implementations
> of the IDF can be done in future.
> Instead today sqoop SPI that holds connectors depends on SDK which in fact
> should be the other way round, the connector API is the root and should not
> depend on its implemenation package.
> connector SDK was intended to hold concrete implementations and some extent
> utility classes that the connectors use, there is obvioulsy some leaks and
> execution engine even depends on connecto-rsdk
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
