Mike & David, Are you +1 for contributing the examples or +1 for moving the examples out into separate repos?
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:52 PM, David Medinets <david.medin...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > On Nov 14, 2014 11:18 AM, "Keith Turner" <ke...@deenlo.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Corey Nolet <cjno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Josh, > > > > > > > My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes > > > moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. > > > > > > You do have a good point. My hope was that this could be the beginning > of > > > our changing history so that we could begin to encourage the community > to > > > contribute their own source directly and give them an outlet for doing > > so. > > > I understand that's also the intent of hosting open source repos under > > ASF > > > to begin with- so I'm partial to either outcome. > > > > > > > I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher > had > > > mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people > externally > > > (more "how do I do X" examples) and internally (keep devs honest about > > how > > > our APIs are implemented). > > > > > > I would think that would just require keeping the repos up to date as > > > versions change so they wouldn't get out of date and possibly releasing > > > them w/ our other releases. > > > > > > > > > Wherever they end up living, thank you Adam for the contributions! > > > > > > > I'll 2nd that. > > > > For the following reasons, I think it might be nice to move existing > > examples out of core into their own git repo(s). > > > > * Examples would be based on released version of Accumulo > > * Examples could easily be built w/o building all of Accumulo > > * As Sean said, this would keep us honest > > * The examples poms would serve as examples more than they do when part > of > > Accumulo build > > * Less likely to use non public APIs in examples > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Josh Elser <josh.el...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes > > > > moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. I think > > there's > > > > precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, > next > > > to > > > > examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more "how do > I > > do > > > > X" examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are > > > > implemented). > > > > > > > > Bringing the examples into the core also encourages us to grow the > > > > community which has been stagnant with respect to new committers for > > > about > > > > 9 months now. > > > > > > > > > > > > Corey Nolet wrote: > > > > > > > >> +1 for adding the examples to contrib. > > > >> > > > >> I was, myself, reading over this email wondering how a set of 11 > > > separate > > > >> examples on the use of Accumulo would fit into the core codebase- > > > >> especially as more are contributed over tinme. I like the idea of > > giving > > > >> community members an outlet for contributing examples that they've > > built > > > >> so > > > >> that we can continue to foster that without having to fit them in > the > > > core > > > >> codebase. It just seems more maintainable. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Josh Elser<josh.el...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of > > "substantial". > > > >>> Thanks. > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> Mike Drob wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples. It's > > clearly > > > >>>> non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered > "substantial" > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elser<josh.el...@gmail.com > > > > > >>>> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Sean Busbey wrote: > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser< > > josh.el...@gmail.com> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>> wrote: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Personally, I didn't really think that this contribution was > in > > > the > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> spirit > > > >>>>>>> of what the new codebase adoption guidelines were meant to > cover. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> Some extra examples which leverage what Accumulo already does > > seems > > > >>>>>>> more > > > >>>>>>> like improvements for new Accumulo users than anything else. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> It's content developed out side of the project list. That's > > all > > > it > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> takes to > > > >>>>>> require the trip through the Incubator checks as far as the ASF > > > >>>>>> guidelines > > > >>>>>> are concerned. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> From http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>> """ > > > >>>>> From time to time, an external codebase is brought into the ASF > > > that > > > >>>>> is > > > >>>>> not a separate incubating project but still represents a > > substantial > > > >>>>> contribution that was not developed within the ASF's source > control > > > >>>>> system > > > >>>>> and on our public mailing lists. > > > >>>>> """ > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Not to look a gift-horse in the mouth (it is great work), but I > > don't > > > >>>>> see > > > >>>>> these examples as "substantial". I haven't found guidelines yet > > that > > > >>>>> better > > > >>>>> clarify the definition of "substantial". > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > > > >
