+1 from me for the proposal ignoring the "where it goes". I think the refactors proposed in it make sense no matter what, and the simulation ability should provide some very much needed testability improvements.
In particular replacing File with Path is something we have been looking to do (and were planning to bring up as a CEP in the coming months), as it gives a much better ability to plugin alternate file system access code. We had someone do a POC internally at one point showing you could do fun things like access files in Google Cloud buckets directly from sstableloader with such a change (https://github.com/googleapis/java-storage-nio <https://github.com/googleapis/java-storage-nio>). -Jeremiah > On Jul 15, 2021, at 8:21 AM, Benjamin Lerer <ble...@apache.org> wrote: > > Does anybody have some other concerns than the target date? > If not, I believe that we can start a vote tomorrow. > > Le mer. 14 juil. 2021 à 23:18, Nate McCall <zznat...@gmail.com> a écrit : > >>> >>> >>> >>>> Yes, we should perhaps remove target version from the template, and >>>> introduce guidance on describing stability impact etc. >>> >>> Strong +1 to remove this from the template. I got sucked into the mistake >>> of conflating implementation details and implications on where it lands >>> instead of staying high level in the "do we agree we need this". >>> >>> And I'm a +1 on the "I agree we need this". >>> >> >> +1 to focusing on the _if_ (I think we need it). >> >> IMO we could keep the target version in the template and allow "To Be >> Decided (TBD)" as it could be useful for larger efforts or specific >> features. (I don't want to bikeshed on that though and won't complain if >> that field goes away.) >> >> Appreciate the debate and refocusing, though! >>
