Is there a chance the module could be moved up a level in git, next to 
solr-exporter, with own build and a package manifest? We could still ship it in 
tarball as a 1st party package and document the bin/solr package install 
command necessary to install it.

I’d vote for a move in 10.0, with deprecation of the module-version in 9.x.

Jan Høydahl

> 23. feb. 2023 kl. 03:41 skrev David Smiley <[email protected]>:
> 
> I suppose all code can wait till some future big version unless it's some
> sort of bug fix applicable to the present.  It's just a shame that a module
> I perceive to be less used, delaying things.
> 
> ~ David Smiley
> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
> 
> 
> On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 11:08 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> 
>>> (e.g. by shading) it but it hasn't happened yet.  Personally, I don't
>> think
>>> Hadoop-Auth is important enough to continue to thwart this progress on
>>> SolrCloud.  Agreed?
>> 
>> Agreed, in principle. But, if your suggestion is that we do this in 9x,
>> then I need more clarification as to why this can't wait until 10x.
>> 
>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 9:35 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>>> We could stop shipping this module with 9.3, say, until the versioning
>>> issue allows it to return.
>>> 
>>> Not sure if I follow correctly, but do you mean we stop shipping
>>> hadoop-auth with Solr starting 9.3?
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 7:37 AM David Smiley <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> FYI there's the beginning of an important conversation in
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16116 pertaining to how we
>>>> deal
>>>> with modules that want version-X of a dependency but Solr-core would
>> like
>>>> to have version-Y.  Let's further that discussion here.
>>>> 
>>>> With a minor ClassLoader change, we could easily support this for a user
>>>> with their own custom module, but these first-party modules are another
>>>> matter.  These are compiled, tested, and packaged by our build.  It's
>>>> probably too much work for our build to handle varying versions of a
>>>> dependency?
>>>> 
>>>> The problem has blocked progress on a strategic direction of SolrCloud
>> for
>>>> a year now, and the module in question is hadoop-auth, and the
>> dependency
>>>> is Curator.  It's expected to be resolved by the Hadoop project someday
>>>> (e.g. by shading) it but it hasn't happened yet.  Personally, I don't
>>>> think
>>>> Hadoop-Auth is important enough to continue to thwart this progress on
>>>> SolrCloud.  Agreed?
>>>> 
>>>> We could stop shipping this module with 9.3, say, until the versioning
>>>> issue allows it to return.  One way I prefer is to merely deactivate the
>>>> Gradle module (or say, only tests & JAR publishing) thereby leaving
>> source
>>>> in-place, which is nicer for source control history when it returns,
>> which
>>>> we expect it to.  Of course the other way is outright removal.
>>>> 
>>>> ~ David Smiley
>>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to