+1 on having both an examples/ and external/ directory. external/ is a
better name than other/


On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 9:50 AM, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]> wrote:

> I like the idea of using the name "external" as it more effectively
> communicates that the contents are not part of the core project.
>
> I also like having examples as a top-level directory to make it easier for
> users to find.
>
> - Taylor
>
> On Mar 16, 2014, at 7:02 AM, Michael G. Noll <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > One further piece of food for thought:
> >
> > The Spark project has the following directory layout [1] in this regard:
> >
> > examples/
> > external/
> >    |
> >    +-- flume
> >    +-- kafka
> >    +-- mqtt
> >    +-- twitter
> >    +-- zeromq
> >
> > Note how 'kafka" is a connector to another OSS tool -- like
> > storm-kafka's spout -- where as 'twitter' is their implementation of
> > pulling data from Twitter's (streaming) API.  Of course, the 'kafka'
> > code similarly connects to an API, but there's is still a small
> > difference between 'twitter' (hosted API run by Twitter) and 'kafka'
> > (your own Kafka infrastructure).  Both sub-projects fit nicely under
> > 'external' though IMHO.
> >
> > As I said -- just further brainstorming.
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark
> >
> >
> >
> > On 03/14/2014 08:06 PM, Nathan Marz wrote:
> >> How about we make a folder under root called "other" in which everything
> >> non-core can go. We can do further subfolders if we want called
> "examples"
> >> and "connectors" - I don't care either way. I think this will first of
> all
> >> make it clear these things are not part of the core project, and it will
> >> also prevent the root of the source from getting cluttered with too much
> >> stuff.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Taylor,
> >>>
> >>> You guys have been doing a generally excellent job.  I was just
> chiming in
> >>> on the chance that there was doubt.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 4:09 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Thanks Ted,
> >>>>
> >>>> We're being very careful when pulling in additional code by taking
> steps
> >>>> to preserve commit history (chain of evidence), and when necessary,
> >>>> initiate the IP clearance process (haven't had to yet).
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Cool.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> The latter is kind of a gray area as far as I can tell from questions
> >>> I've
> >>>> asked on general@. It seems to be a judgment call based on the size
> of
> >>>> the contribution.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> It is exactly that.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> If there's anything else we can do to make sure we get these things
> >>> right,
> >>>> or do a better job, please let us know.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> So far, things are going swimmingly, due in no small part to your
> efforts.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -Taylor
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Mar 13, 2014, at 4:03 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Having a committer sign off on each addition has a very large role at
> >>>>> Apache.  One of the key aspects of Apache software releases is that
> all
> >>>> of
> >>>>> the code is traceable back to the original contributor and there is a
> >>>>> logical chain that allows Apache to stand behind the licensing of the
> >>>> code.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This licensing and chain of evidence is a big part of what makes open
> >>>>> source palatable to risk averse businesses.  It is really important
> to
> >>>>> maintain.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Storm has a very good record of doing this before being part of
> Apache
> >>>>> which makes integration into Apache processes easier, but it is
> >>> important
> >>>>> to hang on to that careful approach.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 12:58 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <
> [email protected]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Exactly.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That's why I proposed that anything that's brought in require at
> least
> >>>> on
> >>>>>> committer to "sponsor" it:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>


-- 
Twitter: @nathanmarz
http://nathanmarz.com

Reply via email to