I suppose that most everything if not all from libs/options will go to OPTIONAL (I’d call it simply ‘apache-ignite-libs'). More precise lib selection (if something from optional would better to have in core package) will be discussed right after preliminary split architecture agreement.
> On 15 Mar 2018, at 22:11, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com> wrote: > > I like idea of keeping simple system of modules, so +1 from me. > > Where optional libs (e.g Direct IO plugin) would be included, would it be > core or optional? > > чт, 15 мар. 2018 г. в 22:09, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org>: > >>> >>>> >>>> How big would be a final core module? >>> Around 30M. Can be shrinked to ~15M if separate Visor and create it’s own >>> package. >> >> >> Guys, 30 vs 280M is a huuuuge difference. I would agree with Petr and >> propose the simplest modular system: >> >> - core module that includes basic Ignite capabilities including SQL, >> compute grid, service grid, k/v >> - optional module hosts the rest - ML, streamers integration (kafka, >> flink), kubernetes, etc. >> >> What do you think? >> >> -- >> Denis >> >> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 12:36 AM, Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> *DEB package >>> >>> >>>> On 15 Mar 2018, at 10:35, Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Considering that DEV package for now is almost platform independent >> (its >>> a java application more or less), that package will work almost on any >>> DEB-based linux, including but not limited to Ubuntu, Debian, etc. >>>> The only restriction is existence of systemctl (systemd) service >> manager >>> — we are dependent on it. >>>> >>>> Thats why, for instance, our RPM repository is called simply ‘rpm’ and >>> package has no arch or dist suffix — it will work on CentOS, RHEL, >> Fedora, >>> etc. with presence of aforementioned systemd. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 15 Mar 2018, at 07:57, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Will Debian package work for Ubuntu? >>>>> >>>>> D. >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 9:52 PM, Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Not a problem, rather nuisance. Also, when we will move to official >>>>>> repositories, there can be a problem from OS community. >>>>>> >>>>>> Concerning DEB packages — I plan to use RPM as base for DEB package >>> build >>>>>> (package layout / install scripts) for speeding up things and >> excluding >>>>>> possible duplication and desynchronisation, so its a matter of ’sit >>> and do’ >>>>>> rather then some technical research. Thats why I rose discussion >> about >>>>>> future package architecture, so that after agreement I'm be able to >>> pack >>>>>> both RPM and DEB identically. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yet, if you insist, I can create DEB package according to current RPM >>>>>> layout in no time. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 15 Mar 2018, at 04:53, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Peter, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't think the package size of 280M is going to be a problem at >>> all, >>>>>> but >>>>>>> what you are suggesting can be an improvement down the road. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In the mean time, I think our top priority should be to provide >>> packages >>>>>>> for Debian and Ubuntu. Having only RPMs is not nearly enough. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Agree? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> D. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 5:36 AM, vveider <mr.wei...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi, Igniters! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Release 2.4 is almost there, at least binary part of it, so I'd >> like >>> to >>>>>>>> move >>>>>>>> forward to further improve and widen AI delivery through packages. >>>>>>>> As of now, Apache Ignite ships in RPM package weighing about 280M+ >>> and, >>>>>> to >>>>>>>> improve usability and significantly reduce required download >> sizes, I >>>>>>>> purpose that in 2.5 release we introduce splitted delivery as >>> follows: >>>>>>>> - CORE >>>>>>>> - bin >>>>>>>> - config >>>>>>>> - libs (!optional) >>>>>>>> - OPTIONAL LIBS >>>>>>>> - BENCHMARKS >>>>>>>> - DOCS (?) >>>>>>>> - EXAMPLES >>>>>>>> - .NET PLATFORM FILES >>>>>>>> - C++ PLATFORM FILES >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This architecture, as I assume, will add flexibility (no reason to >>>>>> download >>>>>>>> all 280M+ of binaries where you are to run only core node >>> functionality) >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>> maintainability (you are in full control of what is installed on >> your >>>>>>>> system). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> After successful architecture choice, same scheme are planned to be >>>>>> used in >>>>>>>> DEB packages as well. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> WDYT? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>
