Github user spmallette commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/705
At this point I'd be -1 if we turned this into a "feature". I only thought
of this as a convenience to TinkerGraph. As I mentioned before I really don't
see why a `clone()` would make sense in most other graph databases. I sort of
think of `clone()` as a feature of TinkerGraph the way indexing is a feature of
TinkerGraph. So I technically preferred the PR as it was as opposed to a
generalized utility function that will work shoddily for large graphs.
Anyway, here's the solution I have that should make everyone content.
@okram liked this as a utility class but ultimately didn't have strong feeling
about it either way. @mpollmeier seemed to make it clear that this was to help
with testing. How about we just move `GraphHelper` to gremlin-test.
https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/tree/master/gremlin-test/src/main/java/org/apache/tinkerpop/gremlin
Then it is a utility that clearly exists for testing use cases only.
TinkerGraph depends on gremlin-test and can thus directly test it's capabilties
- maybe just add your "clone" test to:
https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/blob/master/tinkergraph-gremlin/src/test/java/org/apache/tinkerpop/gremlin/tinkergraph/structure/TinkerGraphTest.java
@mpollmeier if this is agreeable to you, perhaps wait a few days to see if
there are other comments before progressing forward. i'd hate for you to make
more changes and then someone yells -1 at you.
---
