Thanks for taking this on James, and especially for your effort to preserve all the discussions. It helps a lot. I can only imagine how tedious that was. ;)
I think for existing pull requests, we should let the author (pull request initiator) handle the migration. That will help weed out some of the older pull requests that are obsolete, etc., and allow those who are passionate about a patch push for it. Taylor > On Dec 15, 2013, at 3:37 AM, James Xu <[email protected]> wrote: > > Github issues are all migrated to JIRA now. What do we do to the Pull > Requests in github? > >> On 2013年12月11日, at 下午10:56, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> On Dec 11, 2013, at 8:59 AM, Gianmarco De Francisci Morales >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> 3. Get an answer on whether we can continue to use 0mq as a dependency >>>> given it’s LGPL license. And if so, what are the implications for >>>> source-only and binary releases. >>>> >>> >>> There has been some discussion around this issue. See, e.g., >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/200508.mbox/%[email protected]%3e >> >> Our solution for 0mq is to move that code out to a separate, non-Apache >> project. If users want to use the 0mq transport they can download/build it >> and install it themselves. >> >>> >>> 5. Figure out what to do with Thrift. Right now we’re using a forked >>>> version with packages renamed to avoid conflicts, which I could potentially >>>> cause problems with releasing under Apache. One potential fix would be to >>>> use a stock Thrift version and repackage it using jarjar. >>> >>> >>> Would solving the more general class loader issue also solve this specific >>> issue? >>> https://github.com/nathanmarz/storm/issues/115 >> >> Yes it would. But solving that issue is easier said than done. We’re >> currently exploring the use of jarjar to repackage it until a time when #115 >> can be properly addressed. >> >> - Taylor >> >
