A live meeting is a good idea. Email discussions tend to make people seem more
dogmatic than they really are, because everyone focuses on the 10% of the
argument they disagree with, rather than the 90% they agree with.
I will endeavor to attend.
Julian
> On Dec 19, 2019, at 12:06 PM, Kevin
>
> I believe that writing is not great to understand somebody's tone and
> intentions and many things can be misunderstood. Maybe for this and other
> similar issues we should try to hold live discussions.
Shall we try to organize an online meeting?
I think this is a good idea to try. I think
Kevin>and every response was against the change
This ^^ is false.
Haisheng Yuan: "Unless we change $ to other symbol, I am inclined to keep
using Java"
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e3cbf20d22f7a4cc870626c0bc41b99430c2cc37318052d083166653%40%3Cdev.calcite.apache.org%3E
Rui Wang: "Can we
>
> Kevin, what is your opinion on removing Quidem language?
>
Completely unrelated to the topic at hand. This is specifically about
Kotlin.
It is sad you mention "code readability" as "little benefit currently" item.
Please don't put words into my mouth. I have nothing wrong with improving
Calcite wouldn't be a great project without Julian's and Vladimir's
contributions. Everybody wants the best for the project and we should work
out to find a solution.
I believe that writing is not great to understand somebody's tone and
intentions and many things can be misunderstood. Maybe for
I've used the new version calcite with new version of IntelliJ, everything
works. I like that.
I can see valadmir put some efforts in this, I respect that. and all effort
put in to the codebase should be respected.
from my side, I don't contribute as much now, but occasionally I would look
at the
Le mar. 17 déc. 2019 à 15:26, Vladimir Sitnikov
a écrit :
>
> Vladimir>Quidem, CalciteAssert
> Michael>If you want to propose removing either of these, we could have a
> Michael>discussion about it, but you're talking about code which is already
> Michael>heavily used throughout Calcite.
>
> The
Vladimir>Quidem, CalciteAssert
Michael>If you want to propose removing either of these, we could have a
Michael>discussion about it, but you're talking about code which is already
Michael>heavily used throughout Calcite.
The point of "we assume contributors are good at Java, thus we must keep
the
Le mar. 17 déc. 2019 à 10:59, Vladimir Sitnikov
a écrit :
>
> Michael>However, we know our
> Michael>current contributors are reasonably fluent in Java. I'm not sure
> about
> Michael>Kotlin.
>
> 1) New contributions are not fluent in Quidem at all
> 2) New contributions are not fluent in
Michael>However, we know our
Michael>current contributors are reasonably fluent in Java. I'm not sure
about
Michael>Kotlin.
1) New contributions are not fluent in Quidem at all
2) New contributions are not fluent in CalciteAssert at all
3) As I said, if someone does not want to get familiar with
Hello Calcite Team,
I believe products are advancing through constant improvements rather than
freezing codebase. Why does nobody consider Kotlin as an opportunity to
improve Calcite? Indeed, most of the replies sound like: "I don't want to
learn Kotlin because it requires extra efforts, etc,
Le mar. 17 déc. 2019 à 03:30, Vladimir Sitnikov
a écrit :
>
> Kevin>Focusing on the technical side of things, I agree that introducing a
> new
> Kevin>language is of little benefit currently
>
> Kevin, what is your opinion on removing Quidem language?
> Focusing on the technical side, it is a
Kevin>Focusing on the technical side of things, I agree that introducing a
new
Kevin>language is of little benefit currently
Kevin, what is your opinion on removing Quidem language?
Focusing on the technical side, it is a standalone language.
The language is not Java, it has limited tooling, it
Julian>actions over the last few weeks have left me angry, depressed, and
burned out with the project
That is sad. Please accept my apologies for hurting your feelings.
Julian>Of course, a lot of the things he is removing are things that I
personally have created, so I naturally take this more
As far as I can see, introducing Kotlin does not have remarkable benefits.
Furthermore, it
brings some extra burdens. So I am +1 for removing Kotlin.
Best,
Chunwei
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 8:38 AM Kevin Risden wrote:
> Focusing on the technical side of things, I agree that introducing a new
Focusing on the technical side of things, I agree that introducing a new
language is of little benefit currently. I am not paying super close
attention to the commits lately and am surprised that a change went in to
switch to Kotlin especially after the discussion that is happening on the
mailing
Vladimir proposed that we convert some tests to Kotlin. The general reaction
was against the idea[1]. After receiving this feedback, he went ahead anyway[2].
I propose that we remove all Kotlin from our source code, including tests. The
benefits of being a hybrid Java+Kotlin project do not
17 matches
Mail list logo
