sub

[Dongxu Wang]

Re: maintain the IoTDB-Skywalking plugin codes

[HW-Chao Wang]

thanksSkywalking community.i feel should be 
apache/iotdb-skywalking-storage.skywalking be not a required module for 
iotdb，separate from apache/iotdb.



---Original---
From: "Xiangdong Huang"https://github.com/apache/skywalking/discussions/9059

Best,
---
Xiangdong Huang
School of Software, Tsinghua University

黄向东
清华大学 软件学院

[BUILD-FAILURE]: Job 'IoTDB/IoTDB-Pipe/master [master] [591]'

[Apache Jenkins Server]

BUILD-FAILURE: Job 'IoTDB/IoTDB-Pipe/master [master] [591]':

Check console output at "https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/IoTDB/job/IoTDB-Pipe/job/master/591/;>IoTDB/IoTDB-Pipe/master
 [master] [591]"

maintain the IoTDB-Skywalking plugin codes

[Xiangdong Huang]

Hi all,

Skywalking community is discussing about only keeping self-implemented
storage layer.

IMO, I think it is not a bad decision to remove 3rd-part implementataion
from skywalking's main repo.  Because we can decide which version of
skywalking we can maintain according to the community developers' time.
However, IoTDB-skywalking integration has its meaning and we should keep to
maintain the integration.

The discussion is, where to put the integration to?

a new code repo like: apache/iotdb-skywalking-storage?
or into IoTDB's repo like apache/iotdb/skywalking?

[1] https://github.com/apache/skywalking/discussions/9059

Best,
---
Xiangdong Huang
School of Software, Tsinghua University

 黄向东
清华大学 软件学院