For me more than size the problem is usage of Lucene To use full power of Oak we need to include Lucene 4.x and thus would need to drop JR2. So probably have two modules
1. oak-run - server, benchmarking, console, debugging, scalability, backup 2. oak-migration - upgrade, jr2 specific benchmarking (possibly by including the oak-run classes only Various sub features in oak-run together do not still add much complexity and are neatly seperated via various main methods. So should be ok for now Chetan Mehrotra On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Michael Dürig <mdue...@apache.org> wrote: > > > On 27.5.14 3:33 , Jukka Zitting wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Michael Dürig <mdue...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> Apart from that - and this is probably a separate discussion - I also >>> think >>> we should split oak-run up as it is getting too heavy. >> >> >> Too heavy in which way? > > > Functionality wise. It is growing into a "chief cook and bottle washer". It > already does backup, benchmarking, simple console, debugging, server, > upgrade, and scalability testing. There is also the Groovy Console coming > along and probably a couple of repair tools. Also I'd prefer Scala or Frege > to Groovy. Others probably Clojure or Jython. > > Michael
