[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3871?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17073464#comment-17073464
]
Vladimir Sitnikov edited comment on CALCITE-3871 at 4/2/20, 8:05 AM:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
{quote}I think it makes sense to keep the apiguardian on our side.{quote}
Can you please clarify what do you mean? Do you mean we should keep it as a
dependency? Do you mean we should borrow it as a class (and maintain license
clearance!)?
was (Author: vladimirsitnikov):
{quote}I think it makes sense to keep the apiguardian on our side.{quote}
Can you please clarify what do you mean?
> Remove dependency of org.apiguardian:apiguardian-api
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-3871
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3871
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core, linq4j
> Affects Versions: 1.22.0
> Reporter: Danny Chen
> Assignee: Danny Chen
> Priority: Major
> Labels: pull-request-available
> Time Spent: 20m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> The org.apiguardian:apiguardian-api is introduced in CALCITE-3652 in order to
> mark the new introduced API status.
> Remove the dependency and copy the class into Calcite because the
> org.apiguardian:apiguardian-api jar has only a single API.java class and it
> is not necessary to add a dependency for that(All the downstream projects
> that have calcite-core as a dependency would see this jar which is annoying).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
