To not let this discussion die, here is a concrete JIRA and a proposed layout to restructure to.
What remains to be discusses is whether we want to keep the Scala/Java APIs for batch/streaming in separate projects or in one project. Also, we need to find a good time to do this, when we are low on pull requests... https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1712 Proposed Layout: - flink-hadoop (shaded fat jar) - Core (Core and Java and Scala) - Streaming (core + java + scala) - Runtime - Client (Client + Optimizer) - Examples (Java + Scala + Streaming Java + Streaming Scala) - Tests (test-utils (compile) and tests (test)) - Quickstarts - Quickstart Java - Quickstart Scala - connectors / Input/Output Formats - Avro - HBase - HadoopCompartibility - HCatalogue - JDBC - kafka - rabbit - ... - staging - Gelly - Gilbert (ML) - spargel (deprecated) - expression API - contrib - yarn - dist - yarn tests - java 8 On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Henry Saputra <henry.sapu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Marton, having 2 threads discussing same thing can be confusing. > > - Henry > > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 3:52 AM, Márton Balassi <mbala...@apache.org> > wrote: > > Let us consider this thread the standard for the restructure, it is > > perfectly in line with the wishes I have posted. > > > > +1 for keeping the 'flink-' prefix. > > > > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Henry Saputra <henry.sapu...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> @Robert, and @Stephan, sure I am ok with it, thanks for the responses. > >> > >> - Henry > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > >> > I think this works well together with Marton's restructuring. > >> > > >> > I would vote to keep the "flink-" prefix, because it guarantees that > the > >> > produced jars are prefixed with "flink-". Otherwise, we will have to > >> start > >> > configuring a lot... > >> > > >> > Greetings, > >> > Stephan > >> > > >> > > >> > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Henry Saputra < > henry.sapu...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Will this conflict with Marton's restructuring proposal which happens > >> >> in another thread (see "Project restructure" thread in the dev@ > list). > >> >> > >> >> Since we are doing refactoring, may I suggest that we also remove > >> >> "flink-" prefix since maven group name will indicate it is part of > >> >> Flink. > >> >> > >> >> - Henry > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 6:52 AM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> >> > Hi everyone! > >> >> > > >> >> > I think that by now, quite a bit of the maven project structure > can be > >> >> > improved to get rid of some legacy artifacts. Especially the > >> >> "flink-addons" > >> >> > project seems to be a catch-all place for various projects. > >> >> > > >> >> > Here is a suggestion what we could do: > >> >> > > >> >> > 1) Move "flink-yarn" to the root. > >> >> > > >> >> > 2) Move "flink-streaming" to the root (this is planned anyways for > the > >> >> next > >> >> > release) > >> >> > > >> >> > 3) Create a project "flink-connectors", which will contain "avro", > >> >> "jdbc", > >> >> > and "hbase". Should we have them as separate sub-projects, or as > one > >> >> > project? > >> >> > > >> >> > 4) Consolidate the examples into a single project "flink-examples", > >> where > >> >> > Java, Scala, Streaming examples exist in different packages. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > Greetings, > >> >> > Stephan > >> >> > >> >
