“ A quick heads up to the dev list with the jira would be sufficient for anybody interested in discussing it further to comment on the jira.”
Agreed, I did’t mean voting but more or less we have the lazy consensus or sharing concerns. Discussing them on a ticket should be enough but it needs to happen. Also, it shouldn’t be more often than adding dependencies I guess. JDK team is only closing more and more internals and warning us about potential breakages. I want to prevent us from urgent fixing in patch releases and to ease the maintenance. I think ensuring that it is clearly documented why an exception is acceptable and what options were considered will be of benefit for maintenance. We can revise in time what has changed. “ . Unless absolutely needed we should avoid accessing the internals. Folks on this project should understand why. We can make the dangers of this explicit in our contributor documentation. ” +1 On Fri, 2 Sep 2022 at 1:26, Dinesh Joshi <djo...@apache.org> wrote: > Personally not opposed to this. However, this is something that should be > vetted closely by the reviewers. Unless absolutely needed we should avoid > accessing the internals. Folks on this project should understand why. We > can make the dangers of this explicit in our contributor documentation. > However, requiring an entire dev list discussion around it seems > unnecessary. A quick heads up to the dev list with the jira would be > sufficient for anybody interested in discussing it further to comment on > the jira. WDYT? > > Dinesh > > On Sep 1, 2022, at 8:31 AM, Ekaterina Dimitrova <e.dimitr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > Some time ago we added a note to the project Cassandra Code Style: > “New dependencies should not be included without community consensus first > being obtained via a [DISCUSS] thread on the dev@cassandra.apache.org > mailing list” > > I would like to suggest also to add a point around accessing JDK > internals. Any patch that suggests accessing internals and/or adding even > more add-opens/add-exports to be approved prior commit on the mailing list. > > It seems to me the project can only benefit of this visibility. If > something is accepted as an exception, we need to have the right > understanding and visibility of why; in some cases maybe to see for > alternatives, to have follow up tickets opened, ownership taken. In my > opinion this will be very helpful for maintaining the codebase. > > If others agree with that I can add a sentence to the Code Style. Please > let me know what you think. > > Best regards, > Ekaterina > > >
