-1 - Ignite is a single Apache project, it follows Apache release guidelines, with voting and so on. Not sure how are we going to follow that with a separate repo. - Thin client features are often tied to server-side changes
> What about dotnet and cpp thin clients? Those reuse some code with thick counterparts - same way as Java thin does. On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 4:22 PM Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org> wrote: > What about dotnet and cpp thin clients? > > > 21 апр. 2020 г., в 16:19, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org> > написал(а): > > > > +1 since > > - Simpler release may allow us to release more often > > - Often releases - users will get updates faster, more chances to grow > and > > keep our user base > > - Faster updates and easy to get next update may have positive effect on > > community growth. Since newcomer may want to fix a bug and later use > result > > in his/her production environment. > > > > вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 13:27, Alexey Zinoviev <zaleslaw....@gmail.com>: > > > >> Agree with these non-JVM languages. > >> Especially for Python:) > >> > >> вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 12:58, Igor Sapego <isap...@apache.org>: > >> > >>> Guys, > >>> > >>> It was discussed on the dev list a few times that it would be a good > >>> idea to move Python, Node.js and PHP thin clients to separate repos > >>> and separate release cycles. > >>> > >>> In short there are several arguments for that: > >>> > >>> 1. There are no dependencies on the core functionality so there is > simply > >>> no need for them to be in the main repo. > >>> > >>> 2. Those thin clients often do not get updates from release to release, > >> but > >>> still > >>> we "release" them, as they are a part of the main release. > >>> > >>> 3. Moving them to a separate release cycle will allow us to release > some > >>> hot > >>> fixes for those clients faster and easier. > >>> > >>> 4. Composer needs a PHP packet that is released to be in a separate > >>> repository. > >>> > >>> Thoughts? > >>> > >>> Best Regards, > >>> Igor > >>> > >> > >
