[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-163?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12798901#action_12798901
]
Doug Cutting commented on AVRO-163:
-----------------------------------
I didn't notice that the file you first pointed to was part of a larger demo
tree. That'd be a great thing to have for Avro, but I'm not sure what
provisions you'd like for it in the directory organization. Would you want
each implementation to include the tutorial code within its tree, or would you
prefer a top-level tutorial tree? Either way, I don't see that it affects the
current restructuring much. Am I missing something?
> Each language Avro supports should be a separate package
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: AVRO-163
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-163
> Project: Avro
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: c, c++, java, python
> Environment: We currently release Avro as a single monolithic tarball
> with ant being used to build all the languages that Avro supports.
> Reporter: Matt Massie
> Assignee: Doug Cutting
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 1.3.0
>
> Attachments: AVRO-163-cpp.patch, AVRO-163.patch, AVRO-163.patch,
> AVRO-163.patch, AVRO-163.sh
>
> Original Estimate: 8h
> Remaining Estimate: 8h
>
> *Build Issue*
> While ant is used for building Java projects, it is almost never used to
> build python, c++ or c projects. C and C++ projects are often managed using
> autotools while Python uses setuptools. Forcing these languages to use a
> foreign build system ('ant') is suboptimal and will cause us headaches as we
> move forward.
> *Release issue*
> Releasing a single monolithic package forces users of one language to
> download binary and source for all languages. For example, at this time the
> Avro C distribution is only 384K in size (built using autotools 'make
> distcheck' target). People interested in using the C implementation would be
> forced to download a large monolithic tarball (currently 3.8 MB) that
> includes dozens of third-party jar files for the Java implementation.
> Furthermore, C users would be forced to use 'ant' as the top-level build
> tool. This monolithic approach would also prevent us from submitting Avro
> for inclusion in Linux distribution yum/apt repositories as RPM and Debian
> packages. It's important to allow C/C++ code to have a pristine release
> tarball on which to base Debian and RPM packaging.
> *Solution*
> Create top-level directories: 'java', 'python', 'c++ ' , 'c', 'shared' and
> 'release'. Each language directory would contain the source for that
> language and use the build system natural for that language, e.g. ant,
> autotools, setuptools, gem, etc. The 'shared' directory would have, for
> example, common test schema and data files for interoperability testing
> between each language. A simple top-level bash script would call into each
> language to build a release package, documentation, etc. into the 'release'
> directory. Each Avro release would then be compromised of package(s) for
> each language Avro supports, e.g. avro-java-1.2.3.tar.gz,
> pyavro-1.2.3.tar.gz, avro-c++-1.2.3.tar.gz and avro-c-1.2.3.tar.gz. Later
> on, we'll also likely have libavro-devel-1.2.3-1.x86_64.rpm too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
