Github user mccheah commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19954 > I don't think they are independent as architecturally they make sense together and represent a single concern: enabling use of remote dependencies through init-containers. Missing any one of the three makes the feature unusable. I would also argue that it won't necessarily make review easier as reviewers need to mentally connect them together to make sense of each change set. If the general conclusion is that we should first refactor the code to achieve a better abstraction instead of getting this feature into 2.3, I can buy that. But I don't think we should tackle this as three components. It is true that introducing each of those components individually doesn't make the feature usable, but these parts are independent in the sense that they each have different classes and different sections of code. Furthermore the architectural considerations are different for each of them. There's some architectural connection between the submission client and the driver configuring the driver and the executor pods though given that we're trying to share code. But the init-container itself can be contributed as a completely separate push. Basically I'm wondering if we can reduce the diff in any way. Making the code itself simpler as we've been discussing is certainly the primary way.
--- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org