On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 4:21 AM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Answers inline > > Il Gio 9 Apr 2020, 05:28 Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> ha scritto: > > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 2:01 PM Damien Diederen <ddiede...@sinenomine.net > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Christopher, > > > > > > > I am just curious if anybody has thought about, or perhaps discussed, > > > > the idea that the projects in the zookeeper-contrib folder should be > > > > in their own separate git repos? > > > > > > We were discussing this a few days ago: > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/1068#issuecomment-607160440 > > > > > > My (only) concern was that I wouldn't want to see contribs *even more* > > > abandoned than they are now: > > > > Yep > But I'd no one contributes to them it is better to drop them from master. > > > > > That's a fair concern. It is always sad to see code get abandoned. > > Moving them out won't solve a "lack of interest" problem. Apache is > > composed of volunteers... and sometimes interest in a project withers. > > But, it can help organize whatever remaining (or future) interest > > there is by decoupling the contrib and presenting it as a smaller, > > more focused project. > > > > > > > > >> While I wouldn't be opposed to moving "unpopular" bindings to their > > > >> own repository, it would probably only make sense to do so if merge > > > >> rules are somewhat relaxed—as I suspect it would otherwise be even > > > >> more difficult to meet the "two PMC approvals" threshold. > > > > We need two committers +1, not strictly PMCs. > This is setting the quality of our product, > everything we deliver must have the same level. > > Personally I find good to keep the python binding, and maybe to make it a > sibling of the C client inside the zookeeper-clients module. > I saw recent activity on fat-jar. > > Sounds right to me re python. I've seen it used and also a good way to validate the c client. On the flip side there is an established AL2 python zk client which is active: https://github.com/python-zk/kazoo Patrick > Other modules seem abandoned so no value for me in keeping them. > > Enrico > > > > > > That already seems like a pretty high bar to me, even for the main > > project. It's definitely more strict than the other Apache projects > > I've contributed to. I can see how it could be a problem if there is > > diminished interest in these contribs. The PMC would have to decide > > how they want to approach that. > > > > > > > > But whatever the outcome is: > > > > > > >> In any case: I am willing to be automatically marked as a reviewer > > > >> for (at least) the zkperl and zkpython "contribs." Do we have such a > > > >> mechanism? I see that GitHub implements some such mechanisms (1, 2), > > > >> but I'm not sure how applicable they are to our case. Never hesitate > > > >> to ping me manually! > > > > > > > I'm asking because I've been looking a lot at the build, trying to > > > > find ways to improve it, and I think this might be a nice improvement > > > > to streamline the core ZooKeeper build. This can help side-projects > > > > succeed or fail on their own merits, rather than be bound to the core > > > > project so tightly, and it could make it easier for contributors to > > > > know where to contribute, by making each independent component > smaller > > > > and easier to navigate through the code. > > > > > > Mostly agree—except that I would subsitute "popularity" for "merits." > > > (Which may or may not change the conclusion.) > > > > Yes, popularity. :) > > > > > > > > Cheers, -D > > >
