I am reworking the web frontend a bit (PR may come in a bit) and was
thinking the same thing.
Would also allow to vastly reduce the runtime dependencies, since all the
webserver stuff would be out...
On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 9:11 PM, Henry Saputra
wrote:
> Also looks like runtime getting too big
Also looks like runtime getting too big.
Thoughts about moving the web info frontend to separate maven module?
- Henry
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 2:46 AM, Stephan Ewen wrote:
> To not let this discussion die, here is a concrete JIRA and a proposed
> layout to restructure to.
>
> What remains to b
Optimizer and Compiler can stay separate, of course.
I was just thinking that we have a lot of projects and this would be a
simple way to get rid of one. But it actually is intuitive to me as well to
keep them separate.
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Fabian Hueske wrote:
> I agree that it's a
I agree that it's a good idea to move the APIs into one module.
But why should we merge client and compiler (optimizer) and the examples
into one module?
I think modules with clearly separated responsibilities can also help new
contributors to navigate the code.
2015-03-17 16:16 GMT+01:00 Stephan
The good thing about the API projects is that there is no dependency from
Java code to Scala code. I think that caused most of the issues.
We may still want to keep it separate. I am not fully decided on this yet...
Stephan
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Ufuk Celebi wrote:
> Thanks for bring
Thanks for bringing this up, Till. You are right, but I think the main
issue was that tight interaction between Java and Scala was problematic. I
am not sure whether this is such a big problem for the the APIs.
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Till Rohrmann wrote:
> Putting the Scala and Java AP
Putting the Scala and Java API into the same module means that we'll have
more mixed Java/Scala projects, right? I just want to check if everyone is
aware of it considering our latest experiences with these kind of modules.
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Ufuk Celebi wrote:
> +1 I like the prop
+1 I like the proposed structure.
The only thing I was wondering about is whether to name "core" => "batch"?
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Márton Balassi
wrote:
> +1 for the proposed structure.
>
> I have no explicit preference for having batch and streaming scala together
> or separated. T
+1 for the proposed structure.
I have no explicit preference for having batch and streaming scala together
or separated. That said streaming scala is considerably thin, it does not
really require an own maven submodule.
Marked an older JIRA for the same issue as duplicate. [1]
[1] https://issues
To not let this discussion die, here is a concrete JIRA and a proposed
layout to restructure to.
What remains to be discusses is whether we want to keep the Scala/Java APIs
for batch/streaming in separate projects or in one project.
Also, we need to find a good time to do this, when we are low on
10 matches
Mail list logo
