On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 1:42 AM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the summary. > > * Given that a solution based on Gradle ExecFork or Gretty would only serve > > Polaris devs, and would not be usable by users, it does not seems to be a > > good fit for the overarching goal. > > Could you clarify the specific feature gaps of ExecFork and Gretty compared > to the proposed plugin? I feel like I have answered that question multiple times already though. Those two options only work with Gradle. They cannot be used by Maven users. I do not think it is a good idea to exclude a substantial number of Enterprises projects. Besides, a ExecFork based approach would likely not be transferable to other projects. It would be implemented in Polaris build files directly. A concrete test case or example would help validate the difference. > Note that the Gretty solution you offered is inapplicable. Gretty cannot run Quarkus servers. On a separate note, would it make sense to host this plugin in a standalone > repo? From the PR, it appears to be quite self-contained. > There is a contradiction here. On one hand, you are saying that you would rather have an ExecFork based implementation. And that implementation would live directly in Polaris build files themselves, so in the `apache/polaris` repository. And on the other hand you ask about putting the current implementation in a different repository altogether. What benefits are you expecting from moving the Apprunner into a dedicated repository? Pierre
