Sorry, I linked the document instead of the PR. I wanted to link the document at the beginning of the letter after "It was said here"
The PR: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/670 Norbert On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 11:49 PM Norbert Kalmar <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi community! > > As outlined in the start document, it was planned to separate the java > files to server and client, with common files in a separate common module. > It was said here: > > "Fifth iteration - move src/java/main to zk-server, which will be further > separated in Phase 2." > > But in order to save rebase for the contributors, I merged this into one > step. (I had a letter about it) > So I already created zookeeper-server, zookeeper-client and > zookeeper-common. > > But after doing the separation, I have to say... this just hardly makes > any sense. > Without breaking backward compatibility by making changes in the package > structure, it just makes the code more unreadable than before. Multiple > packages has to be present in all 3 modules (as it was never an intention > to separate it, so many classes are just not in their logical package, and > even inner classes used when top level would be required for the > separation). Client and server code can not be divided to only depend on > common. Either server depends on client - which makes more sense than the > other option - or client depend on server. > (Or make common so fat, only literally a few class remains in server and > client - which again, makes no sense). > > I created a pull request to illustrate what needs to be done, and this is > not even half complete: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WXqhaPlCwchcWc8RCEzbCmVa4WbBDlfR3GQngikGjqc/edit?usp=sharing > > Some more detail in the description. > > My suggestion: > forget about zookeeper-client-java and zookeeper-common, and just leave > zookeeper-server. > > It just doesn't make any sense looking at the result, only makes the > project much more complicated. The java code is too much tangled together. > > What would this mean if I just create zookeeper-common? All the files had > to be renamed anyway, so some now would have 2 renames (fortunately most of > the files are in zookeeper-server anyway), and possible another rebase for > some PR's. > > Any input is appreciated. > > Regards, > Norbert > > > >
