Great, I just posted some comments / improvement suggestions.
I have to say I'm still not 100% convinced by the strategy not to add a
suffix to all modules. Here is a small example that illustrates my concerns.
Consider the following chained dependency situation. We have pure Java
artifact *flink-pure-java* which depends on a Scala artifact
*flink-some-scala-A*, which in turn depends on *flink-some-scala-B*.
Let's say the user has directly included *flink-pure-java* and
*flink-some-scala-B* in the his project and wants to build for Scala 2.11.
We end up with a situation like this
- flink-pure-java
`- flink-some-scala-A
`- flink-some-scala-B
- flink-some-scala-B_2.11
We end up having both versions of *flink-some-scala-B* in our project.
2015-07-03 12:24 GMT+02:00 Chiwan Park <chiwanp...@apache.org>:
> Hi All,
> I created a PR for this issue. [1] Please check and comment about the PR.
>
> Regards,
> Chiwan Park
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/885
>
> > On Jul 2, 2015, at 5:59 PM, Chiwan Park <chiwanp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > @Alexander I’m happy to hear that you want to help me. If you help me, I
> really appreciate. :)
> >
> > Regards,
> > Chiwan Park
> >
> >
> >> On Jul 2, 2015, at 2:57 PM, Alexander Alexandrov <
> alexander.s.alexand...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> @Chiwan: let me know if you need hands-on support. I'll be more then
> happy to help (as my downstream project is using Scala 2.11).
> >>
> >> 2015-07-01 17:43 GMT+02:00 Chiwan Park <chiwanp...@apache.org>:
> >> Okay, I will apply this suggestion.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Chiwan Park
> >>
> >>> On Jul 1, 2015, at 5:41 PM, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 01 Jul 2015, at 10:34, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> +1, like that approach
> >>>
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>> I like that this is not breaking for non-Scala users :-)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
