Looks good! I’m very interested in adding a well-defined extension mechanism to geode. IMO, that is an important characteristic of successful open source communities. Looking forward to more details :-)
Anthony > On Mar 15, 2017, at 10:04 AM, Udo Kohlmeyer <ukohlme...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > Hi there Guys, > > The first high-level proposal on Geode modularization has been posted: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Proposal+for+Geode+Modularization. > > Please look through this. It is neither a hard or long read BUT it is the > precursor to the more detailed proposal. > > What is asked of all dev's is that they take a critical look at the code they > are working on and start identifying module boundaries. This identification > and implementation process is the most important piece to the whole > modularization process. Without the identification work, all efforts to have > bootstrapping, DI, streaming, reactive, messaging frameworks is an exercise > in futility. > > If there is any doubt about the size of a module, err on the side of > caution... Smaller is better. If a piece of functionality could plausibly be > replaced with another implementation, it is a strong candidate for a module. > > Over the next few days a more detailed implementation approach will be > proposed. In conjunction to that proposal, a register of modules/potential > modules will be started. This way we can easily identify modules, no matter > how small. > > --Udo >
