On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 4:19 AM Ivan Kelly <iv...@apache.org> wrote: > Resurrecting this thread, since it seems discusssions and decisions > have been made about it, but there's no record of these anywhere that > matters.
There is no decision made. However I am -1 to drop stream profile, as I have explained in may different threads that I have been mentioned. Here is the summary I don’t like dropping stream profile. I put table service and distributedlog under stream, because the whole stuff is built as an extension to bookkeeper core (ledger service). So this extension is optionally. With that being said, the bookkeeper distribution should can be built with and without stream profile. I insist having this profile to enforce people organizing the code and structure in that way. The reason for bkctl should be applied to standalone. > > > 4.8.1-rc1 is out for vote, and once again if you build it in the > default way, random things do not work. Again building bookkeeper without stream profile should work. If it doesn’t, it is a bug to fix. Currently standalone doesn't > work straight away (and it kicks off a build in the background without > indicating whether anything is going on). All the scripts is provided to be working at two conditions: in a released binary package and in a source directory. If it is running in a source directory and it is not built, it will run maven command to build and generating the classpath. > > So, my questions are: > - Are we keeping -Dstream? > -1 to drop the profile - If so, why? As I said, the bookkeeper should be built without stream profile. If not, that is a bug. > > And if we do, keep it, we need to disable anything in the default > build that depends on it. Yes. The organization of the code structure should be fixed. > > I'll hold off from voting on the RC until there's a concrete plan to > resolve all this. > > -Ivan > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 10:11 AM Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Actually let's hold on this change for now. > > > > I was actually talking with JV about this. There are two many directories > > (modules) at the root level. > > It is a bit unclear about what modules. We might consider reorganizing > the > > modules to make it clearer. > > I will come back with a proposal soon. > > > > - Sijie > > > > On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 5:18 AM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Sijie > > > This is a proposal > > > It is possilble that the precommit stuff will need a follow up patch, > to > > > add a new precommit "subtask" > > > > > > Please check it out > > > https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1680 > > > > > > Enrico > > > > > > Il giorno lun 13 ago 2018 alle ore 09:57 Ivan Kelly <iv...@apache.org> > ha > > > scritto: > > > > > > > +1 for dropping the profiles. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 12:24 AM, Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > I have no problem with this proposal. I am fine with dropping the > > > > profiles. > > > > > > > > > > Sijie > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 2:53 AM Enrico Olivelli < > eolive...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Hi, > > > > >> Currently in order to build the full code you have to add -Dstream > > > > >> property, this in turn will activate the 'stream' profile. > > > > >> Additionally to run tests in 'stream' submodule you have to also > add > > > > >> -DstreamTests. > > > > >> > > > > >> This is very annoying, and now that we are going to release the > > > 'stream' > > > > >> storage module as first class citizen it does not make much sense. > > > > >> > > > > >> This additional profile makes it more complex project wide > operations > > > > like > > > > >> the release procedure. > > > > >> For instance I broke master branch yesterday because I did not > advance > > > > the > > > > >> version in poms in the stream submodule. > > > > >> > > > > >> It is giving a lot of problems on code coverage stuff as well, > because > > > > we > > > > >> have a very complex configuration of surefire. > > > > >> > > > > >> My proposal is to drop those profiles and let the stream module > to be > > > > built > > > > >> together with the other parts. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> For the ones like me that work only on bookkeeper-server this > change > > > > won't > > > > >> affect every day work. > > > > >> > > > > >> I would prefer that Sijie do this change as he introduced those > > > profiles > > > > >> and knowns very well all the tricks. > > > > >> > > > > >> Regards > > > > >> Enrico > > > > >> -- > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> -- Enrico Olivelli > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
