Re: Contribute Examples/Exercises
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Corey Nolet cjno...@gmail.com wrote: Josh, My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. You do have a good point. My hope was that this could be the beginning of our changing history so that we could begin to encourage the community to contribute their own source directly and give them an outlet for doing so. I understand that's also the intent of hosting open source repos under ASF to begin with- so I'm partial to either outcome. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). I would think that would just require keeping the repos up to date as versions change so they wouldn't get out of date and possibly releasing them w/ our other releases. Wherever they end up living, thank you Adam for the contributions! I'll 2nd that. For the following reasons, I think it might be nice to move existing examples out of core into their own git repo(s). * Examples would be based on released version of Accumulo * Examples could easily be built w/o building all of Accumulo * As Sean said, this would keep us honest * The examples poms would serve as examples more than they do when part of Accumulo build * Less likely to use non public APIs in examples On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). Bringing the examples into the core also encourages us to grow the community which has been stagnant with respect to new committers for about 9 months now. Corey Nolet wrote: +1 for adding the examples to contrib. I was, myself, reading over this email wondering how a set of 11 separate examples on the use of Accumulo would fit into the core codebase- especially as more are contributed over tinme. I like the idea of giving community members an outlet for contributing examples that they've built so that we can continue to foster that without having to fit them in the core codebase. It just seems more maintainable. On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of substantial. Thanks. Mike Drob wrote: The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples. It's clearly non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered substantial On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Sean Busbey wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Personally, I didn't really think that this contribution was in the spirit of what the new codebase adoption guidelines were meant to cover. Some extra examples which leverage what Accumulo already does seems more like improvements for new Accumulo users than anything else. It's content developed out side of the project list. That's all it takes to require the trip through the Incubator checks as far as the ASF guidelines are concerned. From http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html From time to time, an external codebase is brought into the ASF that is not a separate incubating project but still represents a substantial contribution that was not developed within the ASF's source control system and on our public mailing lists. Not to look a gift-horse in the mouth (it is great work), but I don't see these examples as substantial. I haven't found guidelines yet that better clarify the definition of substantial.
Re: Contribute Examples/Exercises
+1 On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Keith Turner ke...@deenlo.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Corey Nolet cjno...@gmail.com wrote: Josh, My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. You do have a good point. My hope was that this could be the beginning of our changing history so that we could begin to encourage the community to contribute their own source directly and give them an outlet for doing so. I understand that's also the intent of hosting open source repos under ASF to begin with- so I'm partial to either outcome. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). I would think that would just require keeping the repos up to date as versions change so they wouldn't get out of date and possibly releasing them w/ our other releases. Wherever they end up living, thank you Adam for the contributions! I'll 2nd that. For the following reasons, I think it might be nice to move existing examples out of core into their own git repo(s). * Examples would be based on released version of Accumulo * Examples could easily be built w/o building all of Accumulo * As Sean said, this would keep us honest * The examples poms would serve as examples more than they do when part of Accumulo build * Less likely to use non public APIs in examples On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). Bringing the examples into the core also encourages us to grow the community which has been stagnant with respect to new committers for about 9 months now. Corey Nolet wrote: +1 for adding the examples to contrib. I was, myself, reading over this email wondering how a set of 11 separate examples on the use of Accumulo would fit into the core codebase- especially as more are contributed over tinme. I like the idea of giving community members an outlet for contributing examples that they've built so that we can continue to foster that without having to fit them in the core codebase. It just seems more maintainable. On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of substantial. Thanks. Mike Drob wrote: The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples. It's clearly non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered substantial On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Sean Busbey wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Personally, I didn't really think that this contribution was in the spirit of what the new codebase adoption guidelines were meant to cover. Some extra examples which leverage what Accumulo already does seems more like improvements for new Accumulo users than anything else. It's content developed out side of the project list. That's all it takes to require the trip through the Incubator checks as far as the ASF guidelines are concerned. From http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html From time to time, an external codebase is brought into the ASF that is not a separate incubating project but still represents a substantial contribution that was not developed within the ASF's source control system and on our public mailing lists. Not to look a gift-horse in the mouth (it is great work), but I don't see these examples as substantial. I haven't found guidelines yet that better clarify the definition of substantial.
Re: Contribute Examples/Exercises
+1 On Nov 14, 2014 11:18 AM, Keith Turner ke...@deenlo.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Corey Nolet cjno...@gmail.com wrote: Josh, My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. You do have a good point. My hope was that this could be the beginning of our changing history so that we could begin to encourage the community to contribute their own source directly and give them an outlet for doing so. I understand that's also the intent of hosting open source repos under ASF to begin with- so I'm partial to either outcome. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). I would think that would just require keeping the repos up to date as versions change so they wouldn't get out of date and possibly releasing them w/ our other releases. Wherever they end up living, thank you Adam for the contributions! I'll 2nd that. For the following reasons, I think it might be nice to move existing examples out of core into their own git repo(s). * Examples would be based on released version of Accumulo * Examples could easily be built w/o building all of Accumulo * As Sean said, this would keep us honest * The examples poms would serve as examples more than they do when part of Accumulo build * Less likely to use non public APIs in examples On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). Bringing the examples into the core also encourages us to grow the community which has been stagnant with respect to new committers for about 9 months now. Corey Nolet wrote: +1 for adding the examples to contrib. I was, myself, reading over this email wondering how a set of 11 separate examples on the use of Accumulo would fit into the core codebase- especially as more are contributed over tinme. I like the idea of giving community members an outlet for contributing examples that they've built so that we can continue to foster that without having to fit them in the core codebase. It just seems more maintainable. On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of substantial. Thanks. Mike Drob wrote: The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples. It's clearly non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered substantial On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Sean Busbey wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Personally, I didn't really think that this contribution was in the spirit of what the new codebase adoption guidelines were meant to cover. Some extra examples which leverage what Accumulo already does seems more like improvements for new Accumulo users than anything else. It's content developed out side of the project list. That's all it takes to require the trip through the Incubator checks as far as the ASF guidelines are concerned. From http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html From time to time, an external codebase is brought into the ASF that is not a separate incubating project but still represents a substantial contribution that was not developed within the ASF's source control system and on our public mailing lists. Not to look a gift-horse in the mouth (it is great work), but I don't see these examples as substantial. I haven't found guidelines yet that better clarify the definition of substantial.
Re: Contribute Examples/Exercises
Since there's an opinion to create an examples repo instead of keeping them in the base project, I'm -0 as long we CI set up so that they don't go silently into the night as I previously state as a concern. Some general questions for actually doing this: do we schedule the move of the classes out of the main project for 1.7.0? Will this other repo follow the same development practices as the project (e.g. branch names). How will we release these examples? Can someone step up to make sure all of the above are completed/addressed and file the necessary INFRA JIRA issues? David Medinets wrote: +1 On Nov 14, 2014 11:18 AM, Keith Turnerke...@deenlo.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Corey Noletcjno...@gmail.com wrote: Josh, My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. You do have a good point. My hope was that this could be the beginning of our changing history so that we could begin to encourage the community to contribute their own source directly and give them an outlet for doing so. I understand that's also the intent of hosting open source repos under ASF to begin with- so I'm partial to either outcome. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). I would think that would just require keeping the repos up to date as versions change so they wouldn't get out of date and possibly releasing them w/ our other releases. Wherever they end up living, thank you Adam for the contributions! I'll 2nd that. For the following reasons, I think it might be nice to move existing examples out of core into their own git repo(s). * Examples would be based on released version of Accumulo * Examples could easily be built w/o building all of Accumulo * As Sean said, this would keep us honest * The examples poms would serve as examples more than they do when part of Accumulo build * Less likely to use non public APIs in examples On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). Bringing the examples into the core also encourages us to grow the community which has been stagnant with respect to new committers for about 9 months now. Corey Nolet wrote: +1 for adding the examples to contrib. I was, myself, reading over this email wondering how a set of 11 separate examples on the use of Accumulo would fit into the core codebase- especially as more are contributed over tinme. I like the idea of giving community members an outlet for contributing examples that they've built so that we can continue to foster that without having to fit them in the core codebase. It just seems more maintainable. On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of substantial. Thanks. Mike Drob wrote: The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples. It's clearly non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered substantial On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Sean Busbey wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Personally, I didn't really think that this contribution was in the spirit of what the new codebase adoption guidelines were meant to cover. Some extra examples which leverage what Accumulo already does seems more like improvements for new Accumulo users than anything else. It's content developed out side of the project list. That's all it takes to require the trip through the Incubator checks as far as the ASF guidelines are concerned. From http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html From time to time, an external codebase is brought into the ASF that is not a separate incubating project but still represents a substantial contribution that was not developed within the ASF's source control system and on our public mailing lists. Not to look a gift-horse in the mouth (it is great work), but I don't see these examples as substantial. I haven't found guidelines yet that better clarify the definition of substantial.
Re: Contribute Examples/Exercises
+1 to setting up a Jenkins Job. On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Since there's an opinion to create an examples repo instead of keeping them in the base project, I'm -0 as long we CI set up so that they don't go silently into the night as I previously state as a concern. Some general questions for actually doing this: do we schedule the move of the classes out of the main project for 1.7.0? Will this other repo follow the same development practices as the project (e.g. branch names). How will we release these examples? Can someone step up to make sure all of the above are completed/addressed and file the necessary INFRA JIRA issues? David Medinets wrote: +1 On Nov 14, 2014 11:18 AM, Keith Turnerke...@deenlo.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Corey Noletcjno...@gmail.com wrote: Josh, My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. You do have a good point. My hope was that this could be the beginning of our changing history so that we could begin to encourage the community to contribute their own source directly and give them an outlet for doing so. I understand that's also the intent of hosting open source repos under ASF to begin with- so I'm partial to either outcome. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). I would think that would just require keeping the repos up to date as versions change so they wouldn't get out of date and possibly releasing them w/ our other releases. Wherever they end up living, thank you Adam for the contributions! I'll 2nd that. For the following reasons, I think it might be nice to move existing examples out of core into their own git repo(s). * Examples would be based on released version of Accumulo * Examples could easily be built w/o building all of Accumulo * As Sean said, this would keep us honest * The examples poms would serve as examples more than they do when part of Accumulo build * Less likely to use non public APIs in examples On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). Bringing the examples into the core also encourages us to grow the community which has been stagnant with respect to new committers for about 9 months now. Corey Nolet wrote: +1 for adding the examples to contrib. I was, myself, reading over this email wondering how a set of 11 separate examples on the use of Accumulo would fit into the core codebase- especially as more are contributed over tinme. I like the idea of giving community members an outlet for contributing examples that they've built so that we can continue to foster that without having to fit them in the core codebase. It just seems more maintainable. On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of substantial. Thanks. Mike Drob wrote: The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples. It's clearly non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered substantial On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Sean Busbey wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Personally, I didn't really think that this contribution was in the spirit of what the new codebase adoption guidelines were meant to cover. Some extra examples which leverage what Accumulo already does seems more like improvements for new Accumulo users than anything else. It's content developed out side of the project list. That's all it takes to require the trip through the Incubator checks as far as the ASF guidelines are concerned. From http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html From time to time, an external codebase is brought into the ASF that is not a separate incubating project but still represents a substantial contribution that was not developed within the ASF's source control system and on our public mailing lists. Not to look a gift-horse in the mouth (it is great work), but I don't see these examples as substantial. I haven't found guidelines yet that better clarify the definition of substantial.
Re: Contribute Examples/Exercises
Mike David, Are you +1 for contributing the examples or +1 for moving the examples out into separate repos? On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:52 PM, David Medinets david.medin...@gmail.com wrote: +1 On Nov 14, 2014 11:18 AM, Keith Turner ke...@deenlo.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Corey Nolet cjno...@gmail.com wrote: Josh, My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. You do have a good point. My hope was that this could be the beginning of our changing history so that we could begin to encourage the community to contribute their own source directly and give them an outlet for doing so. I understand that's also the intent of hosting open source repos under ASF to begin with- so I'm partial to either outcome. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). I would think that would just require keeping the repos up to date as versions change so they wouldn't get out of date and possibly releasing them w/ our other releases. Wherever they end up living, thank you Adam for the contributions! I'll 2nd that. For the following reasons, I think it might be nice to move existing examples out of core into their own git repo(s). * Examples would be based on released version of Accumulo * Examples could easily be built w/o building all of Accumulo * As Sean said, this would keep us honest * The examples poms would serve as examples more than they do when part of Accumulo build * Less likely to use non public APIs in examples On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). Bringing the examples into the core also encourages us to grow the community which has been stagnant with respect to new committers for about 9 months now. Corey Nolet wrote: +1 for adding the examples to contrib. I was, myself, reading over this email wondering how a set of 11 separate examples on the use of Accumulo would fit into the core codebase- especially as more are contributed over tinme. I like the idea of giving community members an outlet for contributing examples that they've built so that we can continue to foster that without having to fit them in the core codebase. It just seems more maintainable. On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of substantial. Thanks. Mike Drob wrote: The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples. It's clearly non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered substantial On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Sean Busbey wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Personally, I didn't really think that this contribution was in the spirit of what the new codebase adoption guidelines were meant to cover. Some extra examples which leverage what Accumulo already does seems more like improvements for new Accumulo users than anything else. It's content developed out side of the project list. That's all it takes to require the trip through the Incubator checks as far as the ASF guidelines are concerned. From http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html From time to time, an external codebase is brought into the ASF that is not a separate incubating project but still represents a substantial contribution that was not developed within the ASF's source control system and on our public mailing lists. Not to look a gift-horse in the mouth (it is great work), but I don't see these examples as substantial. I haven't found guidelines yet that better clarify the definition of substantial.
Re: Contribute Examples/Exercises
We can try using git fitler-branch to create the repo and preserve history. On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Since there's an opinion to create an examples repo instead of keeping them in the base project, I'm -0 as long we CI set up so that they don't go silently into the night as I previously state as a concern. Some general questions for actually doing this: do we schedule the move of the classes out of the main project for 1.7.0? Will this other repo follow the same development practices as the project (e.g. branch names). How will we release these examples? Can someone step up to make sure all of the above are completed/addressed and file the necessary INFRA JIRA issues? David Medinets wrote: +1 On Nov 14, 2014 11:18 AM, Keith Turnerke...@deenlo.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Corey Noletcjno...@gmail.com wrote: Josh, My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. You do have a good point. My hope was that this could be the beginning of our changing history so that we could begin to encourage the community to contribute their own source directly and give them an outlet for doing so. I understand that's also the intent of hosting open source repos under ASF to begin with- so I'm partial to either outcome. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). I would think that would just require keeping the repos up to date as versions change so they wouldn't get out of date and possibly releasing them w/ our other releases. Wherever they end up living, thank you Adam for the contributions! I'll 2nd that. For the following reasons, I think it might be nice to move existing examples out of core into their own git repo(s). * Examples would be based on released version of Accumulo * Examples could easily be built w/o building all of Accumulo * As Sean said, this would keep us honest * The examples poms would serve as examples more than they do when part of Accumulo build * Less likely to use non public APIs in examples On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). Bringing the examples into the core also encourages us to grow the community which has been stagnant with respect to new committers for about 9 months now. Corey Nolet wrote: +1 for adding the examples to contrib. I was, myself, reading over this email wondering how a set of 11 separate examples on the use of Accumulo would fit into the core codebase- especially as more are contributed over tinme. I like the idea of giving community members an outlet for contributing examples that they've built so that we can continue to foster that without having to fit them in the core codebase. It just seems more maintainable. On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of substantial. Thanks. Mike Drob wrote: The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples. It's clearly non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered substantial On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Sean Busbey wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Personally, I didn't really think that this contribution was in the spirit of what the new codebase adoption guidelines were meant to cover. Some extra examples which leverage what Accumulo already does seems more like improvements for new Accumulo users than anything else. It's content developed out side of the project list. That's all it takes to require the trip through the Incubator checks as far as the ASF guidelines are concerned. From http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html From time to time, an external codebase is brought into the ASF that is not a separate incubating project but still represents a substantial contribution that was not developed within the ASF's source control system and on our public mailing lists. Not to look a gift-horse in the mouth (it is great work), but I don't see these examples as substantial. I haven't found guidelines yet that better clarify the definition of
Re: Contribute Examples/Exercises
I am +1 for setting up a Jenkins Job, which implies a separate repository, I think. On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Corey Nolet cjno...@gmail.com wrote: Mike David, Are you +1 for contributing the examples or +1 for moving the examples out into separate repos? On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:52 PM, David Medinets david.medin...@gmail.com wrote: +1 On Nov 14, 2014 11:18 AM, Keith Turner ke...@deenlo.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Corey Nolet cjno...@gmail.com wrote: Josh, My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. You do have a good point. My hope was that this could be the beginning of our changing history so that we could begin to encourage the community to contribute their own source directly and give them an outlet for doing so. I understand that's also the intent of hosting open source repos under ASF to begin with- so I'm partial to either outcome. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). I would think that would just require keeping the repos up to date as versions change so they wouldn't get out of date and possibly releasing them w/ our other releases. Wherever they end up living, thank you Adam for the contributions! I'll 2nd that. For the following reasons, I think it might be nice to move existing examples out of core into their own git repo(s). * Examples would be based on released version of Accumulo * Examples could easily be built w/o building all of Accumulo * As Sean said, this would keep us honest * The examples poms would serve as examples more than they do when part of Accumulo build * Less likely to use non public APIs in examples On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). Bringing the examples into the core also encourages us to grow the community which has been stagnant with respect to new committers for about 9 months now. Corey Nolet wrote: +1 for adding the examples to contrib. I was, myself, reading over this email wondering how a set of 11 separate examples on the use of Accumulo would fit into the core codebase- especially as more are contributed over tinme. I like the idea of giving community members an outlet for contributing examples that they've built so that we can continue to foster that without having to fit them in the core codebase. It just seems more maintainable. On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of substantial. Thanks. Mike Drob wrote: The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples. It's clearly non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered substantial On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Sean Busbey wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Personally, I didn't really think that this contribution was in the spirit of what the new codebase adoption guidelines were meant to cover. Some extra examples which leverage what Accumulo already does seems more like improvements for new Accumulo users than anything else. It's content developed out side of the project list. That's all it takes to require the trip through the Incubator checks as far as the ASF guidelines are concerned. From http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html From time to time, an external codebase is brought into the ASF that is not a separate incubating project but still represents a substantial contribution that was not developed within the ASF's source control system and on our public mailing lists. Not to look a gift-horse in the mouth (it is great work), but I don't see these examples as substantial. I haven't
Re: Contribute Examples/Exercises
Having done this in the past, I have a hard time suggesting this approach. As a single module, the code probably won't compile for most of the history that we preserve, so it's not like we'd be able to efficiently bisect or take advantage of the history. On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Keith Turner ke...@deenlo.com wrote: We can try using git fitler-branch to create the repo and preserve history. On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Since there's an opinion to create an examples repo instead of keeping them in the base project, I'm -0 as long we CI set up so that they don't go silently into the night as I previously state as a concern. Some general questions for actually doing this: do we schedule the move of the classes out of the main project for 1.7.0? Will this other repo follow the same development practices as the project (e.g. branch names). How will we release these examples? Can someone step up to make sure all of the above are completed/addressed and file the necessary INFRA JIRA issues? David Medinets wrote: +1 On Nov 14, 2014 11:18 AM, Keith Turnerke...@deenlo.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Corey Noletcjno...@gmail.com wrote: Josh, My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. You do have a good point. My hope was that this could be the beginning of our changing history so that we could begin to encourage the community to contribute their own source directly and give them an outlet for doing so. I understand that's also the intent of hosting open source repos under ASF to begin with- so I'm partial to either outcome. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). I would think that would just require keeping the repos up to date as versions change so they wouldn't get out of date and possibly releasing them w/ our other releases. Wherever they end up living, thank you Adam for the contributions! I'll 2nd that. For the following reasons, I think it might be nice to move existing examples out of core into their own git repo(s). * Examples would be based on released version of Accumulo * Examples could easily be built w/o building all of Accumulo * As Sean said, this would keep us honest * The examples poms would serve as examples more than they do when part of Accumulo build * Less likely to use non public APIs in examples On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). Bringing the examples into the core also encourages us to grow the community which has been stagnant with respect to new committers for about 9 months now. Corey Nolet wrote: +1 for adding the examples to contrib. I was, myself, reading over this email wondering how a set of 11 separate examples on the use of Accumulo would fit into the core codebase- especially as more are contributed over tinme. I like the idea of giving community members an outlet for contributing examples that they've built so that we can continue to foster that without having to fit them in the core codebase. It just seems more maintainable. On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of substantial. Thanks. Mike Drob wrote: The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples. It's clearly non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered substantial On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Sean Busbey wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Personally, I didn't really think that this contribution was in the spirit of what the new codebase adoption guidelines were meant to cover. Some extra examples which leverage what Accumulo already does seems more like improvements for new Accumulo users than anything else. It's content developed out side of the project list. That's all it takes to require the trip through the Incubator checks as far as the ASF guidelines are
Re: Contribute Examples/Exercises
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:57 PM, Mike Drob mad...@cloudera.com wrote: Having done this in the past, I have a hard time suggesting this approach. never tried it. Was there anything else you did not like about it (other than being useless for bisect)? The history would still be in accumulo repo. As a single module, the code probably won't compile for most of the history that we preserve, so it's not like we'd be able to efficiently bisect or take advantage of the history. On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Keith Turner ke...@deenlo.com wrote: We can try using git fitler-branch to create the repo and preserve history. On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Since there's an opinion to create an examples repo instead of keeping them in the base project, I'm -0 as long we CI set up so that they don't go silently into the night as I previously state as a concern. Some general questions for actually doing this: do we schedule the move of the classes out of the main project for 1.7.0? Will this other repo follow the same development practices as the project (e.g. branch names). How will we release these examples? Can someone step up to make sure all of the above are completed/addressed and file the necessary INFRA JIRA issues? David Medinets wrote: +1 On Nov 14, 2014 11:18 AM, Keith Turnerke...@deenlo.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Corey Noletcjno...@gmail.com wrote: Josh, My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. You do have a good point. My hope was that this could be the beginning of our changing history so that we could begin to encourage the community to contribute their own source directly and give them an outlet for doing so. I understand that's also the intent of hosting open source repos under ASF to begin with- so I'm partial to either outcome. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). I would think that would just require keeping the repos up to date as versions change so they wouldn't get out of date and possibly releasing them w/ our other releases. Wherever they end up living, thank you Adam for the contributions! I'll 2nd that. For the following reasons, I think it might be nice to move existing examples out of core into their own git repo(s). * Examples would be based on released version of Accumulo * Examples could easily be built w/o building all of Accumulo * As Sean said, this would keep us honest * The examples poms would serve as examples more than they do when part of Accumulo build * Less likely to use non public APIs in examples On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). Bringing the examples into the core also encourages us to grow the community which has been stagnant with respect to new committers for about 9 months now. Corey Nolet wrote: +1 for adding the examples to contrib. I was, myself, reading over this email wondering how a set of 11 separate examples on the use of Accumulo would fit into the core codebase- especially as more are contributed over tinme. I like the idea of giving community members an outlet for contributing examples that they've built so that we can continue to foster that without having to fit them in the core codebase. It just seems more maintainable. On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Josh Elserjosh.el...@gmail.com wrote: I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of substantial. Thanks. Mike Drob wrote: The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples. It's clearly non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered substantial On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Sean Busbey wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Personally, I didn't really think that this contribution was in the
Re: Contribute Examples/Exercises
Wasn't the whole discussion about making existing and future examples contribs? (Which itself implies its own repo) Did I miss something? On Nov 14, 2014 10:56 AM, Mike Drob mad...@cloudera.com wrote: I am +1 for setting up a Jenkins Job, which implies a separate repository, I think. On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Corey Nolet cjno...@gmail.com wrote: Mike David, Are you +1 for contributing the examples or +1 for moving the examples out into separate repos? On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:52 PM, David Medinets david.medin...@gmail.com wrote: +1 On Nov 14, 2014 11:18 AM, Keith Turner ke...@deenlo.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Corey Nolet cjno...@gmail.com wrote: Josh, My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. You do have a good point. My hope was that this could be the beginning of our changing history so that we could begin to encourage the community to contribute their own source directly and give them an outlet for doing so. I understand that's also the intent of hosting open source repos under ASF to begin with- so I'm partial to either outcome. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). I would think that would just require keeping the repos up to date as versions change so they wouldn't get out of date and possibly releasing them w/ our other releases. Wherever they end up living, thank you Adam for the contributions! I'll 2nd that. For the following reasons, I think it might be nice to move existing examples out of core into their own git repo(s). * Examples would be based on released version of Accumulo * Examples could easily be built w/o building all of Accumulo * As Sean said, this would keep us honest * The examples poms would serve as examples more than they do when part of Accumulo build * Less likely to use non public APIs in examples On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: My worry with a contrib module is that, historically, code which goes moves to a contrib is just one step away from the grave. I think there's precedence for keeping them in core (as Christopher had mentioned, next to examples/simple) which would benefit people externally (more how do I do X examples) and internally (keep devs honest about how our APIs are implemented). Bringing the examples into the core also encourages us to grow the community which has been stagnant with respect to new committers for about 9 months now. Corey Nolet wrote: +1 for adding the examples to contrib. I was, myself, reading over this email wondering how a set of 11 separate examples on the use of Accumulo would fit into the core codebase- especially as more are contributed over tinme. I like the idea of giving community members an outlet for contributing examples that they've built so that we can continue to foster that without having to fit them in the core codebase. It just seems more maintainable. On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: I'll take that as you disagree with my consideration of substantial. Thanks. Mike Drob wrote: The proposed contribution is a collection of 11 examples. It's clearly non-trivial, which is probably enough to be considered substantial On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Sean Busbey wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote: Personally, I didn't really think that this contribution was in the spirit of what the new codebase adoption guidelines were meant to cover. Some extra examples which leverage what Accumulo already does seems more like improvements for new Accumulo users than anything else. It's content developed out side of the project list. That's all it takes to require the trip through the Incubator checks as far as the ASF guidelines are concerned. From http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html From time to time, an external
