hi robert

i created 2 separate tasks in the OAK-6069 m12n epic to track progress
with ApproximateCounter and NodeUtil|TreeUtil respectively.
moving the ApproximateCounter should be doable with limited effort, we
just need to get a better understanding if that is/will/shouldbe used more
widely than just for the indexing.

the other one probably needs some more effort.
angela 


On 19/04/17 17:45, "Robert Munteanu" <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Tue, 2017-04-18 at 06:21 +0000, Angela Schreiber wrote:
>> Hi Robert
>> 
>> While NodeUtil and TreeUtil would naturally fit to plugins.tree, I am
>> not
>> convinced that ApproximateCounter really belongs there. Afaik it is
>> only
>> used for query index strategy and counting. I would rather move
>> 'ApproximateCounter' to 'plugins.index'.
>> 
>> Regarding moving 'NodeUtil' and 'TreeUtil': IMHO we have here 2
>> utility
>> classes providing almost the same functionality. I would prefer to
>> decide
>> on the redundancy (and potentially clean it up) before moving it to a
>> package that already has semantic versioning enabled (in contrast to
>> the
>> util package where they currently are located).
>> 
>> wdyt?
>
>(Sorry, missed this somehow)
>
>Yes, holding on for now sounds good to me.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Robert
>
>> 
>> Kind regards
>> Angela
>> 
>> 
>> On 14/04/17 12:47, "Robert Munteanu" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> > I created a final PR for this as I have somewhat mixed feelings.
>> > One
>> > one had, it finally nukes the util package. On the other hand, it
>> > looks
>> > like a lot of noise for 3 classes.
>> > 
>> >  
>> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgi
>> > thub.co
>> > m%2Fmreutegg%2Fjackrabbit-
>> > oak%2Fpull%2F6&data=02%7C01%7C%7C287ecd3d735246c
>> > cbc8308d48323b62e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6362
>> > 7763678
>> > 7796080&sdata=HSDWauCHB%2Bb4OaX90CfEWsA7487EP3FvrSicZNgKD8Q%3D&rese
>> > rved=0
>> > 
>> > Robert
>> > 
>> > On Thu, 2017-04-06 at 14:49 +0000, Angela Schreiber wrote:
>> > > Hi Robert
>> > > 
>> > > plugins.tree would feel natural to me.
>> > > regarding the export: not sure about that either... the
>> > > plugins.tree
>> > > has
>> > > some unfortunate dependencies e.g. to oak.core. so probably more
>> > > work
>> > > ahead in that area.
>> > > 
>> > > kind regards
>> > > angela
>> > > 
>> > > On 06/04/17 16:41, "Robert Munteanu" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > 
>> > > > Hi,
>> > > > 
>> > > > Working in the m12n branch [1] I'm trying to get rid of the
>> > > > o.a.j.oak.util package and the last surviving members are
>> > > > ApproximateCounter, NodeUtil and TreeUtil.
>> > > > 
>> > > > As I see it these classes are essentially helpers built on top
>> > > > of
>> > > > the
>> > > > Tree and NodeState APIs. Those would make them candidates on
>> > > > for
>> > > > either
>> > > > oak-store-spi or (if we manage to trim down the dependencies)
>> > > > oak-
>> > > > base.
>> > > > 
>> > > > However I am having trouble naming the package which will hold
>> > > > them.
>> > > > They're not part of the spi, so I can't put them in spi.state .
>> > > > 
>> > > > Maybe they belong in oak-core in plugins.tree, but I'm not sure
>> > > > if
>> > > > we
>> > > > want to keep that as a package which is exported outside oak-
>> > > > core.
>> > > > 
>> > > > Thoughts?
>> > > > 
>> > > > Robert
>> > > > 
>> > > > [1]: 
>> > > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%
>> > > > 2Fgi
>> > > > thub.co
>> > > > m%2Fmreutegg%2Fjackrabbit-
>> > > > oak%2Ftree%2Fm12n&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cbfc1feb5ff4a
>> > > > 4866c79c08d47cfafe6d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0
>> > > > %7C6
>> > > > 3627086
>> > > > 4841267177&sdata=CWwq4ifTZIU1gW9UEd2STRLm%2B1svSP0kvlkLMksmWcM%
>> > > > 3D&r
>> > > > eserved
>> > > > =0
>> > > 
>> > > 
>> 
>> 
>

Reply via email to