I am also more in favor of option 1). 2015-01-24 20:27 GMT+01:00 Kostas Tzoumas <ktzou...@apache.org>:
> Thanks Fabian for starting the discussion. > > I would be biased towards option (1) that Stephan highlighted for the > following reasons: > > - A separate github project is one more infrastructure to manage, and it > lives outside the ASF. I would like to bring as much code as possible to > the Apache Software Foundation, and not divide the codebase into two > separate repositories. > > - The personal gratification (and thus motivation) is higher when > contributing to a top-level Apache project than a github repository > slightly associated with an ASF project. And contributors to the Flink > project get karma that may lead to new committers, which is crucial as the > project is growing. > > Of course, non Apache-licensed contributions cannot be accepted. If we have > a good amount of those, we can start an infrastructure for Flink packages > that lives outside the ASF, but I would wait for the need to come before > doing this. > > My proposal would be to funnel contributions to the main repository (in a > flink-contrib module) for now, including the recent contributions. > > Kostas > > > On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Yes, a "flink-contrib" project would be great. > > > > We have two options: > > > > 1) Make it part of the flink apache project. > > - PRO this makes it easy to get stuff for users > > - CONTRA this means stronger requirements on the code, blocker for code > > that uses dependencies under certain licenses, etc. > > > > 2) Make an independent github project. > > - PRO contributions can depended on more licenses, such as LGPL > > - PRO we can have more people that commit to this repo, committers can > be > > different from flink committers > > - CONTRA people need to grab the extensions from a different location > > > > > > I am slightly biased towards (2), but open to both. > > > > Stephan > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 5:29 AM, Chiwan Park <chiwanp...@icloud.com> > > wrote: > > > > > I think top level maven module called "flink-contrib" is reasonable. > > There > > > are other projects having contrib package such as Akka, Django. > > > > > > Regards, Chiwan Park (Sent with iPhone) > > > > > > 2015. 1. 24. 오후 7:15 Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> 작성: > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > we got a few contribution requests lately to add cool but "non-core" > > > > features to our API. > > > > In previous discussions, concerns were raised to not bloat the APIs > > with > > > > too many "shortcut", "syntactic sugar", or special-case features. > > > > > > > > Instead we could setup a place to add Input/OutputFormats, common > > > > operations, etc. which does not need as much control as the core > APIs. > > > Open > > > > questions are: > > > > - How do we organize it? (top-level maven module, modules in > > flink-java, > > > > flink-scala, java packages in the API modules, ...) > > > > - How do we name it? flink-utils, flink-packages, ... > > > > > > > > Any opinions on this? > > > > > > > > Cheers, Fabian > > > > > >
