Il mar 28 ago 2018, 23:37 Brian Nixon <brian.nixon...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> I still think it makes sense to keep it as a top level directory (would not > include it in recipes). 'zookeeper-jute' is certainly a reasonable name. :) > +1 for zookeeper-jute Enrico > -Brian > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 7:59 AM Norbert Kalmar > <nkal...@cloudera.com.invalid> > wrote: > > > Hi folks, > > > > So jute is a little bit the odd one out in ZooKeeper. It was pulled out > of > > Hadoop and it evolved independently since with ZooKeeper. And it has its > > own namespace in ZK: org.apache.jute beside org.apache.zookeeper. > > > > For me, this is a bit odd, it suggests its a top level apache project. > > The original plan in the maven migration was to move jute to simply in a > > "jute" top level directory in zookeeper. Like this: > > > > > > zookeeper | -bin | -conf | -jute | -zookeeper-client | > -zookeeper-contrib | > > -zookeeper-docs | -zookeeper-it (integration tests) | -zookeeper-server | > > -zookeeper-recipes > > > > But this just seems a bit strange to me. I was thinking of possibly > moving > > into recipes, but then again, I ended up thinking it could still get its > > own top level directory, but with the name "zookeeper-jute", as this > > particular project is only used by ZooKeeper (of course I would keep the > > package name intact). > > > > What do you think? > > As this is a change that was not in the initial doc about maven > migration, > > I thought it's best to ask. > > > > Regards, > > Norbert > > > > p.s.: The best thing would be to use a more standardized library for > > serialization like protobuf or Avro. But that's just a distant dream > right > > now, maybe ZooKeeper v5.0 ;) > > > -- -- Enrico Olivelli
