Re: Modules that could be removed?

+1 on understanding the BAD issues. CB folks are regularly making coordinated changes across two, three+ repos, and things work pretty well. We do have a way less painful way of linking changes instead of ref spec, but other than that things are probably not too dissimilar mechanics-wise. Our

Re: Modules that could be removed?

Likewise - I thought so too - so we should figure out what isn't working with the extensions model! (We do need a good model for things that don't belong in the main open source system but that we want to run tests on regularly so that we're hyper-aware of breakages.) Note that I've always

Re: Modules that could be removed?

Hmm, I thought that the BAD model wasn’t working too badly … little do I know. On the other hand it seems that the module isn’t actually used - at least it seems that there were no changes in the module related to experiments since we merged repositories. Is that right? Or has somebody worked

Re: Modules that could be removed?

My two cents on this is that the BAD model doesn't work well, so I'd personally be against following it. I would vote to keep it inside as well. Steven On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:02 PM abdullah alamoudi wrote: > If that is the case (which makes sense), then keeping it inside

Re: Modules that could be removed?

I read this discussion that Ildar’s suggestion to move asterix-experiments to a different repo would be a solution that works for everybody. Did I read that correctly or did someone disagree with such an approach? Cheers, Till On 31 May 2017, at 16:14, Mike Carey wrote: This should be

Re: Modules that could be removed?

If we move asterix-experiments out, we would need to change the current Perf job at Couchbase. However I think the change would actually make that job less complicated, at least if that allowed one to use a pre-compiled Asterix distribution for experiments rather than requiring the full source

Re: Modules that could be removed?

I'm not a code-guy, of course, but it seems like this could meaningfully/usefully run outside. On 5/31/17 2:53 PM, Yingyi Bu wrote: The code in asterix-experiments is not well organized, e.g.:

Re: Modules that could be removed?

The code in asterix-experiments is not well organized, e.g.: https://github.com/apache/asterixdb/tree/master/asterixdb/asterix-experiments/src/main/java/org/apache/asterix/experiment/builder

Re: Modules that could be removed?

+1 for getting external stuff to be external! On 5/31/17 9:06 AM, Yingyi Bu wrote: Hi dev, I wonder if the following potentially obsolete modules could be moved out of the AsterixDB code base: -- asterix-experiment -- asterix-tools -- hyracks-dist -- hyracks-sever

Re: Modules that could be removed?

I also would vouch for keeping asterix-experiments in. 'asterix-tools' and the others could probably go. On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Taewoo Kim wrote: > @Ildar: +1 > > Best, > Taewoo > > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Ildar Absalyamov < > ildar.absalya...@gmail.com>

Re: Modules that could be removed?

I found Young-Seok’s asterix-experiment package useful for everyone, who is doing any kind of experiments. Can we instead make an ‘asterix-contrib’ repo and move it there, the same way we did with asterix-bad? We can also launch an automated build in Jenkins to verify it builds against master,

Modules that could be removed?

Hi dev, I wonder if the following potentially obsolete modules could be moved out of the AsterixDB code base: -- asterix-experiment -- asterix-tools -- hyracks-dist -- hyracks-sever Any thoughts? Best, Yingyi