[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16078?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17597484#comment-17597484
]
David Smiley commented on SOLR-16078:
-------------------------------------
bq. Having everything under /solr is a bit messy in my opinion.
I agree with the very words you chose -- "a bit". The current situation isn't
particularly bad. It'd be nice to get to the structure you propose -- the
matter is when.
Moving code is disruptive to any PR and to anyone who has a fork of Solr.
Granted forming a module necessarily moves _some_ code but it hasn't been much
so far.
bq. but we are already back-incompat for the solrj-zookeeper stuff
Do you mean, needing to add one additional dependency for the users that
require it? That's a gray area; it sort of is, and very easy to detect & fix
(no code changes!). If we could do some maven manipulations so as to include
it so that there is zero disruption to the vast majority of users, that'd be
awesome but it seems hard?
If you propose changing the coordinates of SolrJ [core] I think that's pulling
the rug out of our users in a minor release that is very needless. Why?
> New solrj-core module
> ---------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-16078
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16078
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: SolrJ
> Reporter: Jan Høydahl
> Priority: Major
> Time Spent: 20m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> We should introduce a solrj-core module that is as slim as possible wrt
> dependencies.
> A user will then add solrj-core as well as any other solj-xx modules needed
> for their use.
> By marking it {{\@lucene.experimental}} we can change the API of this
> solrj-core during 9.x as we move stuff into other modules.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@solr.apache.org
