Re: Native client examples

2017-10-23 Thread Dan Smith
For geode-examples I think it makes sense that they are on released with geode (which they are, see https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Release+Steps). We are currently adding examples for features that will be available in geode 1.4, so we want those to be released in sync with

Re: Native client examples

2017-10-23 Thread Anilkumar Gingade
In line with geode-core and geode-examples any thoughts about having geode-native-examples (on its own repo)... -Anil. On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Jacob Barrett wrote: > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 6:02 PM Dan Smith wrote: > > > However I do think we

Re: Native client examples

2017-10-23 Thread Anthony Baker
The thread I referenced discussed the topic of different release cycles for our repos. The ASF viewpoint is that if you have separate release cycles for different repos you have an independent subproject. And a subproject implies a different community and PMC. Anthony > On Oct 23, 2017, at

Re: Native client examples

2017-10-23 Thread Jacob Barrett
Anthony, I don't see the relevance of the thread you mention. Can you please explain how a discussion on tagging releases in JIRA relates to this discussion? On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:06 AM Anthony Baker wrote: > Before we start this thread again, please read [1]. > >

Re: Native client examples

2017-10-23 Thread Anthony Baker
Before we start this thread again, please read [1]. Anthony [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geode-dev/201701.mbox/%3cdb3f0e86-1d8f-4acc-8323-fe8c135b3...@pivotal.io%3e

Re: Native client examples

2017-10-23 Thread Addison Huddy
I agree with Jake that the examples directory should not be part of our official releases. They should be a light-weight entry point to our community, meaning they should be easy to create, modify, and use. While counter-intuitive, in this case, a less official approach to our examples will

Re: Native client examples

2017-10-23 Thread Jacob Barrett
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 6:02 PM Dan Smith wrote: > However I do think we should be compiling (and hopefully running!) > these examples so that they don't rot over time. Especially since I > believe we are still evolving the native API with breaking changes and > have not