I'll hold off on this until Alex Petrov chimes in. @Alex -> got any thoughts here?
On Tue, May 16, 2023, at 5:17 PM, Jeremy Hanna wrote: > I think it would be great to onboard Harry more officially into the project. > However it would be nice to perhaps do some sanity checking outside of Apple > folks to see how approachable it is. That is, can someone take it and just > run it with the current readme without any additional context? > > I wonder if a mini-onboarding session would be good as a community session - > go over Harry, how to run it, how to add a test? Would that be the right > venue? I just would like to see how we can not only plug it in to regular CI > but get everyone that wants to add a test be able to know how to get started > with it. > > Jeremy > >> On May 16, 2023, at 1:34 PM, Abe Ratnofsky <a...@aber.io> wrote: >> >> Just to make sure I'm understanding the details, this would mean >> apache/cassandra-harry maintains its status as a separate repository, >> apache/cassandra references it as a submodule, and clones and builds Harry >> locally, rather than pulling a released JAR. We can then reference Harry as >> a library without maintaining public artifacts for it. Is that in line with >> what you're thinking? >> >> > I'd also like to see us get a Harry run integrated as part of our >> > pre-commit CI >> >> I'm a strong supporter of this, of course. >> >>> On May 16, 2023, at 11:03 AM, Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> Similar to what we've done with accord in >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18204, I'd like to discuss >>> bringing cassandra-harry in-tree as a submodule. repo link: >>> https://github.com/apache/cassandra-harry >>> >>> Given the value it's brought to the project's stabilization efforts and the >>> movement of other things in the ecosystem to being more integrated (accord, >>> build-scripts https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18133), I >>> think having the testing framework better localized and integrated would be >>> a net benefit for adoption, awareness, maintenance, and tighter workflows >>> as we troubleshoot future failures it surfaces. >>> >>> I'd also like to see us get a Harry run integrated as part of our >>> pre-commit CI (a 5 minute simple soak test for instance) and having that >>> local in this fashion should make that a cleaner integration as well. >>> >>> Thoughts?
