You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@aurora.apache.org by Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> on 2015/08/21 03:08:07 UTC
Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
I was able to put up the review for the fork:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37666/.
Please take a look if you are interested.
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Kevin Sweeney <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1, I suspect we'll find several things that can be replaced by the Java 8
> standard library or newer versions of Guava and Guice.
>
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Just to be clear, I'm proposing forking the java parts only.
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Joseph Smith <ya...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Also a (tough to concede) +1. Although I’m not a fan of the fork, it
> will
> > > help improve velocity and empower a migration away from twitter common.
> > >
> > > > On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:15 PM, Bill Farner <wf...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > That's roughly the eventual plan, which this move would help us
> > > facilitate.
> > > > We use guava heavily already, most of our current dependence is on ZK
> > > and args handling code...but we would look towards dep-shallow
> > alternatives.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _____________________________
> > > > From: Chris Aniszczyk <ca...@gmail.com>
> > > > Sent: Friday, July 3, 2015 8:03 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
> > > > To: <de...@aurora.apache.org>
> > > > Cc: Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'll see what I can do about IP clearance.
> > > >
> > > > For giggles, how much work do you think it would be to shed
> > > twitter-commons
> > > > and just rely on guava and other what I would consider more standard
> > > > libraries.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Bill Farner <wf...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Thanks, Jake!
> > > >>
> > > >> -=Bill
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> yes, makes it easier to donate when its Apache License 2.0, but
> still
> > > >>> requires the IP clearance [1], which is handled through the IPMC.
> > This
> > > is
> > > >>> required so there is an audit trail of that software being donated
> to
> > > the
> > > >>> ASF
> > > >>>
> > > >>> -Jake
> > > >>>
> > > >>> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Bill Farner <wf...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Jake - i'm not fully versed on licenses, but is that true even
> > though
> > > >>> it's
> > > >>>> all Apache License 2.0?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> -=Bill
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org
> >
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> no objections, but we would have to get an IP clearance doc from
> > > >>> Twitter
> > > >>>>> for this code in order to bring this code into the ASF
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> -Jake
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Hey,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Aurora depends heavily on twitter-commons for lots of
> > > >> functionality.
> > > >>>>>> However upstream is not very active and I suspect that it will
> be
> > > >>> less
> > > >>>>>> active in the future. Currently we depend on artifacts published
> > > >> from
> > > >>>>> this
> > > >>>>>> project which causes us to depend on older versions of guava and
> > > >>> guice.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> As a result, it seems that will be difficult to address tickets
> > > >> like
> > > >>>>>> AURORA-1380 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1380>
> > > >>>> without
> > > >>>>>> changing something. I propose we fork all of the java portions
> of
> > > >>>>>> twitter-commons into our tree, remove the parts we don't use and
> > > >>> update
> > > >>>>>> guava and guice so we can move forward on this front.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> What are people's thoughts on this?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>> Zameer Manji
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Chris Aniszczyk
> > > > http://aniszczyk.org
> > > > +1 512 961 6719
> > >
> > > --
> > > Zameer Manji
> > >
> > > <%2B1%20512%20961%206719>
> > >
> >
>
> --
> Zameer Manji
>
>
Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
Posted by Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>.
sure, we can do it in a second commit. we just need to have the namespace
changed to Apache before we create our next release. Sorry if I missed you
planning on that step in the review or a previous thread
-Jake
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
> Jake,
>
> Can the namespace rename be done in a follow up commit? Otherwise the
> review/commit touches every single Java file and becomes very difficult to
> understand.
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Since the IP has been donated to the ASF the namespace com/twitter/common
> > has to be switch to the Apache namespace org/apache/aurora
> >
> > -Jake
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I was able to put up the review for the fork:
> > > https://reviews.apache.org/r/37666/.
> > >
> > > Please take a look if you are interested.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Kevin Sweeney <ke...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1, I suspect we'll find several things that can be replaced by the
> > Java
> > > 8
> > > > standard library or newer versions of Guava and Guice.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Just to be clear, I'm proposing forking the java parts only.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Joseph Smith <ya...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Also a (tough to concede) +1. Although I’m not a fan of the fork,
> > it
> > > > will
> > > > > > help improve velocity and empower a migration away from twitter
> > > common.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:15 PM, Bill Farner <wf...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That's roughly the eventual plan, which this move would help us
> > > > > > facilitate.
> > > > > > > We use guava heavily already, most of our current dependence is
> > on
> > > ZK
> > > > > > and args handling code...but we would look towards dep-shallow
> > > > > alternatives.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _____________________________
> > > > > > > From: Chris Aniszczyk <ca...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > Sent: Friday, July 3, 2015 8:03 AM
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
> > > > > > > To: <de...@aurora.apache.org>
> > > > > > > Cc: Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'll see what I can do about IP clearance.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For giggles, how much work do you think it would be to shed
> > > > > > twitter-commons
> > > > > > > and just rely on guava and other what I would consider more
> > > standard
> > > > > > > libraries.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Bill Farner <
> wfarner@apache.org
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Thanks, Jake!
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> -=Bill
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jake Farrell <
> > jfarrell@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> yes, makes it easier to donate when its Apache License 2.0,
> but
> > > > still
> > > > > > >>> requires the IP clearance [1], which is handled through the
> > IPMC.
> > > > > This
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > >>> required so there is an audit trail of that software being
> > > donated
> > > > to
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > >>> ASF
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> -Jake
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Bill Farner <
> > wfarner@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>> Jake - i'm not fully versed on licenses, but is that true
> even
> > > > > though
> > > > > > >>> it's
> > > > > > >>>> all Apache License 2.0?
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> -=Bill
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Jake Farrell <
> > > jfarrell@apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> no objections, but we would have to get an IP clearance doc
> > > from
> > > > > > >>> Twitter
> > > > > > >>>>> for this code in order to bring this code into the ASF
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> -Jake
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Zameer Manji <
> > > zmanji@apache.org>
> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> Hey,
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> Aurora depends heavily on twitter-commons for lots of
> > > > > > >> functionality.
> > > > > > >>>>>> However upstream is not very active and I suspect that it
> > will
> > > > be
> > > > > > >>> less
> > > > > > >>>>>> active in the future. Currently we depend on artifacts
> > > published
> > > > > > >> from
> > > > > > >>>>> this
> > > > > > >>>>>> project which causes us to depend on older versions of
> guava
> > > and
> > > > > > >>> guice.
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> As a result, it seems that will be difficult to address
> > > tickets
> > > > > > >> like
> > > > > > >>>>>> AURORA-1380 <
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1380>
> > > > > > >>>> without
> > > > > > >>>>>> changing something. I propose we fork all of the java
> > portions
> > > > of
> > > > > > >>>>>> twitter-commons into our tree, remove the parts we don't
> use
> > > and
> > > > > > >>> update
> > > > > > >>>>>> guava and guice so we can move forward on this front.
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> What are people's thoughts on this?
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > > > >>>>>> Zameer Manji
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Chris Aniszczyk
> > > > > > > http://aniszczyk.org
> > > > > > > +1 512 961 6719
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Zameer Manji
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <%2B1%20512%20961%206719>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Zameer Manji
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Zameer Manji
> >
> >
>
Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
Posted by Maxim Khutornenko <ma...@apache.org>.
Commented on the review. Yes, it involves having an intermediate repo
but isn't awfully complicated.
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
> What would the mechanics of a sapling split be? Should I split out the
> files into their own repo and then merge that in with our repo? If
> preserving history is important, would you mind leaving a comment on the
> review?
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Maxim Khutornenko <ma...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> That's actually a good point, which reminds me to ask about the commit
>> history. Any chance to do a sapling split to preserve history?
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > Maxim,
>> >
>> > I really think it is important to minimize the changes made to the
>> twitter
>> > commons files so one can reference the twitter commons sha bc7248d to see
>> > the history of the files.
>> >
>> > I filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1442 to track
>> updating
>> > the copyright headers and moving the files into the namespace.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Maxim Khutornenko <ma...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> I am afraid the upcoming namespace changing sweeper is going to be
>> >> even more monstrous as it will touch all of commons and almost all of
>> >> the aurora codebase.
>> >>
>> >> One alternative could be bring all commons in with all headers and
>> >> apache namespace changes but still reference published external
>> >> commons jars on aurora side. Then switch to internal commons and
>> >> adjust aurora imports as a follow up. That would at least avoid the
>> >> churn in commons files.
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Henry Saputra <henry.saputra@gmail.com
>> >
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > +1 for doing it in follow up commit
>> >> >
>> >> > On Friday, August 21, 2015, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Jake,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Can the namespace rename be done in a follow up commit? Otherwise the
>> >> >> review/commit touches every single Java file and becomes very
>> difficult
>> >> to
>> >> >> understand.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org
>> >> >> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Since the IP has been donated to the ASF the namespace
>> >> com/twitter/common
>> >> >> > has to be switch to the Apache namespace org/apache/aurora
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > -Jake
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org
>> >> >> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > I was able to put up the review for the fork:
>> >> >> > > https://reviews.apache.org/r/37666/.
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > Please take a look if you are interested.
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Kevin Sweeney <
>> kevints@apache.org
>> >> >> <javascript:;>>
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > > +1, I suspect we'll find several things that can be replaced by
>> >> the
>> >> >> > Java
>> >> >> > > 8
>> >> >> > > > standard library or newer versions of Guava and Guice.
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Zameer Manji <
>> zmanji@apache.org
>> >> >> <javascript:;>>
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > > Just to be clear, I'm proposing forking the java parts only.
>> >> >> > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Joseph Smith <
>> >> yasumoto7@gmail.com
>> >> >> <javascript:;>>
>> >> >> > > > wrote:
>> >> >> > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > Also a (tough to concede) +1. Although I’m not a fan of the
>> >> fork,
>> >> >> > it
>> >> >> > > > will
>> >> >> > > > > > help improve velocity and empower a migration away from
>> >> twitter
>> >> >> > > common.
>> >> >> > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > > On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:15 PM, Bill Farner <
>> wfarner@apache.org
>> >> >> <javascript:;>>
>> >> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > > That's roughly the eventual plan, which this move would
>> >> help us
>> >> >> > > > > > facilitate.
>> >> >> > > > > > > We use guava heavily already, most of our current
>> >> dependence is
>> >> >> > on
>> >> >> > > ZK
>> >> >> > > > > > and args handling code...but we would look towards
>> dep-shallow
>> >> >> > > > > alternatives.
>> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > > _____________________________
>> >> >> > > > > > > From: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@gmail.com
>> <javascript:;>>
>> >> >> > > > > > > Sent: Friday, July 3, 2015 8:03 AM
>> >> >> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
>> >> >> > > > > > > To: <dev@aurora.apache.org <javascript:;>>
>> >> >> > > > > > > Cc: Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > > I'll see what I can do about IP clearance.
>> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > > For giggles, how much work do you think it would be to
>> shed
>> >> >> > > > > > twitter-commons
>> >> >> > > > > > > and just rely on guava and other what I would consider
>> more
>> >> >> > > standard
>> >> >> > > > > > > libraries.
>> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Bill Farner <
>> >> >> wfarner@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > > > wrote:
>> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > >> Thanks, Jake!
>> >> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> >> > > > > > >> -=Bill
>> >> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> >> > > > > > >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jake Farrell <
>> >> >> > jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > wrote:
>> >> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>> yes, makes it easier to donate when its Apache License
>> >> 2.0,
>> >> >> but
>> >> >> > > > still
>> >> >> > > > > > >>> requires the IP clearance [1], which is handled through
>> >> the
>> >> >> > IPMC.
>> >> >> > > > > This
>> >> >> > > > > > is
>> >> >> > > > > > >>> required so there is an audit trail of that software
>> being
>> >> >> > > donated
>> >> >> > > > to
>> >> >> > > > > > the
>> >> >> > > > > > >>> ASF
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>> -Jake
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>> [1]:
>> http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Bill Farner <
>> >> >> > wfarner@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > wrote:
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>> Jake - i'm not fully versed on licenses, but is that
>> true
>> >> >> even
>> >> >> > > > > though
>> >> >> > > > > > >>> it's
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>> all Apache License 2.0?
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>> -=Bill
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Jake Farrell <
>> >> >> > > jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> >> >> > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > >>> wrote:
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>> no objections, but we would have to get an IP
>> clearance
>> >> doc
>> >> >> > > from
>> >> >> > > > > > >>> Twitter
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>> for this code in order to bring this code into the
>> ASF
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>> -Jake
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Zameer Manji <
>> >> >> > > zmanji@apache.org <javascript:;>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>> wrote:
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Hey,
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Aurora depends heavily on twitter-commons for lots
>> of
>> >> >> > > > > > >> functionality.
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> However upstream is not very active and I suspect
>> that
>> >> it
>> >> >> > will
>> >> >> > > > be
>> >> >> > > > > > >>> less
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> active in the future. Currently we depend on
>> artifacts
>> >> >> > > published
>> >> >> > > > > > >> from
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>> this
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> project which causes us to depend on older versions
>> of
>> >> >> guava
>> >> >> > > and
>> >> >> > > > > > >>> guice.
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> As a result, it seems that will be difficult to
>> address
>> >> >> > > tickets
>> >> >> > > > > > >> like
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> AURORA-1380 <
>> >> >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1380>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>> without
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> changing something. I propose we fork all of the
>> java
>> >> >> > portions
>> >> >> > > > of
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> twitter-commons into our tree, remove the parts we
>> >> don't
>> >> >> use
>> >> >> > > and
>> >> >> > > > > > >>> update
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> guava and guice so we can move forward on this
>> front.
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> What are people's thoughts on this?
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> --
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Zameer Manji
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > > --
>> >> >> > > > > > > Cheers,
>> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > > Chris Aniszczyk
>> >> >> > > > > > > http://aniszczyk.org
>> >> >> > > > > > > +1 512 961 6719
>> >> >> > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > --
>> >> >> > > > > > Zameer Manji
>> >> >> > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > <%2B1%20512%20961%206719>
>> >> >> > > > > >
>> >> >> > > > >
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > --
>> >> >> > > > Zameer Manji
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --
>> >> >> > Zameer Manji
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Zameer Manji
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>> --
>> Zameer Manji
>>
>>
Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
Posted by Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org>.
What would the mechanics of a sapling split be? Should I split out the
files into their own repo and then merge that in with our repo? If
preserving history is important, would you mind leaving a comment on the
review?
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Maxim Khutornenko <ma...@apache.org>
wrote:
> That's actually a good point, which reminds me to ask about the commit
> history. Any chance to do a sapling split to preserve history?
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Maxim,
> >
> > I really think it is important to minimize the changes made to the
> twitter
> > commons files so one can reference the twitter commons sha bc7248d to see
> > the history of the files.
> >
> > I filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1442 to track
> updating
> > the copyright headers and moving the files into the namespace.
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Maxim Khutornenko <ma...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I am afraid the upcoming namespace changing sweeper is going to be
> >> even more monstrous as it will touch all of commons and almost all of
> >> the aurora codebase.
> >>
> >> One alternative could be bring all commons in with all headers and
> >> apache namespace changes but still reference published external
> >> commons jars on aurora side. Then switch to internal commons and
> >> adjust aurora imports as a follow up. That would at least avoid the
> >> churn in commons files.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Henry Saputra <henry.saputra@gmail.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >> > +1 for doing it in follow up commit
> >> >
> >> > On Friday, August 21, 2015, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Jake,
> >> >>
> >> >> Can the namespace rename be done in a follow up commit? Otherwise the
> >> >> review/commit touches every single Java file and becomes very
> difficult
> >> to
> >> >> understand.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org
> >> >> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Since the IP has been donated to the ASF the namespace
> >> com/twitter/common
> >> >> > has to be switch to the Apache namespace org/apache/aurora
> >> >> >
> >> >> > -Jake
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org
> >> >> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > I was able to put up the review for the fork:
> >> >> > > https://reviews.apache.org/r/37666/.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Please take a look if you are interested.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Kevin Sweeney <
> kevints@apache.org
> >> >> <javascript:;>>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > > +1, I suspect we'll find several things that can be replaced by
> >> the
> >> >> > Java
> >> >> > > 8
> >> >> > > > standard library or newer versions of Guava and Guice.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Zameer Manji <
> zmanji@apache.org
> >> >> <javascript:;>>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > > Just to be clear, I'm proposing forking the java parts only.
> >> >> > > > >
> >> >> > > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Joseph Smith <
> >> yasumoto7@gmail.com
> >> >> <javascript:;>>
> >> >> > > > wrote:
> >> >> > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > Also a (tough to concede) +1. Although I’m not a fan of the
> >> fork,
> >> >> > it
> >> >> > > > will
> >> >> > > > > > help improve velocity and empower a migration away from
> >> twitter
> >> >> > > common.
> >> >> > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > > On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:15 PM, Bill Farner <
> wfarner@apache.org
> >> >> <javascript:;>>
> >> >> > > wrote:
> >> >> > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > > That's roughly the eventual plan, which this move would
> >> help us
> >> >> > > > > > facilitate.
> >> >> > > > > > > We use guava heavily already, most of our current
> >> dependence is
> >> >> > on
> >> >> > > ZK
> >> >> > > > > > and args handling code...but we would look towards
> dep-shallow
> >> >> > > > > alternatives.
> >> >> > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > > _____________________________
> >> >> > > > > > > From: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@gmail.com
> <javascript:;>>
> >> >> > > > > > > Sent: Friday, July 3, 2015 8:03 AM
> >> >> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
> >> >> > > > > > > To: <dev@aurora.apache.org <javascript:;>>
> >> >> > > > > > > Cc: Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>>
> >> >> > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > > I'll see what I can do about IP clearance.
> >> >> > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > > For giggles, how much work do you think it would be to
> shed
> >> >> > > > > > twitter-commons
> >> >> > > > > > > and just rely on guava and other what I would consider
> more
> >> >> > > standard
> >> >> > > > > > > libraries.
> >> >> > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Bill Farner <
> >> >> wfarner@apache.org <javascript:;>
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> >> > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > >> Thanks, Jake!
> >> >> > > > > > >>
> >> >> > > > > > >> -=Bill
> >> >> > > > > > >>
> >> >> > > > > > >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jake Farrell <
> >> >> > jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > > > wrote:
> >> >> > > > > > >>
> >> >> > > > > > >>> yes, makes it easier to donate when its Apache License
> >> 2.0,
> >> >> but
> >> >> > > > still
> >> >> > > > > > >>> requires the IP clearance [1], which is handled through
> >> the
> >> >> > IPMC.
> >> >> > > > > This
> >> >> > > > > > is
> >> >> > > > > > >>> required so there is an audit trail of that software
> being
> >> >> > > donated
> >> >> > > > to
> >> >> > > > > > the
> >> >> > > > > > >>> ASF
> >> >> > > > > > >>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>> -Jake
> >> >> > > > > > >>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>> [1]:
> http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
> >> >> > > > > > >>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Bill Farner <
> >> >> > wfarner@apache.org <javascript:;>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > > > wrote:
> >> >> > > > > > >>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>> Jake - i'm not fully versed on licenses, but is that
> true
> >> >> even
> >> >> > > > > though
> >> >> > > > > > >>> it's
> >> >> > > > > > >>>> all Apache License 2.0?
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>> -=Bill
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Jake Farrell <
> >> >> > > jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>
> >> >> > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>> no objections, but we would have to get an IP
> clearance
> >> doc
> >> >> > > from
> >> >> > > > > > >>> Twitter
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>> for this code in order to bring this code into the
> ASF
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>> -Jake
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Zameer Manji <
> >> >> > > zmanji@apache.org <javascript:;>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Hey,
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Aurora depends heavily on twitter-commons for lots
> of
> >> >> > > > > > >> functionality.
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> However upstream is not very active and I suspect
> that
> >> it
> >> >> > will
> >> >> > > > be
> >> >> > > > > > >>> less
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> active in the future. Currently we depend on
> artifacts
> >> >> > > published
> >> >> > > > > > >> from
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>> this
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> project which causes us to depend on older versions
> of
> >> >> guava
> >> >> > > and
> >> >> > > > > > >>> guice.
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> As a result, it seems that will be difficult to
> address
> >> >> > > tickets
> >> >> > > > > > >> like
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> AURORA-1380 <
> >> >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1380>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>> without
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> changing something. I propose we fork all of the
> java
> >> >> > portions
> >> >> > > > of
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> twitter-commons into our tree, remove the parts we
> >> don't
> >> >> use
> >> >> > > and
> >> >> > > > > > >>> update
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> guava and guice so we can move forward on this
> front.
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> What are people's thoughts on this?
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> --
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Zameer Manji
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>>
> >> >> > > > > > >>
> >> >> > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > > --
> >> >> > > > > > > Cheers,
> >> >> > > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > > Chris Aniszczyk
> >> >> > > > > > > http://aniszczyk.org
> >> >> > > > > > > +1 512 961 6719
> >> >> > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > --
> >> >> > > > > > Zameer Manji
> >> >> > > > > >
> >> >> > > > > > <%2B1%20512%20961%206719>
> >> >> > > > > >
> >> >> > > > >
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > --
> >> >> > > > Zameer Manji
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Zameer Manji
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Zameer Manji
> >>
> >>
>
> --
> Zameer Manji
>
>
Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
Posted by Maxim Khutornenko <ma...@apache.org>.
That's actually a good point, which reminds me to ask about the commit
history. Any chance to do a sapling split to preserve history?
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
> Maxim,
>
> I really think it is important to minimize the changes made to the twitter
> commons files so one can reference the twitter commons sha bc7248d to see
> the history of the files.
>
> I filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1442 to track updating
> the copyright headers and moving the files into the namespace.
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Maxim Khutornenko <ma...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> I am afraid the upcoming namespace changing sweeper is going to be
>> even more monstrous as it will touch all of commons and almost all of
>> the aurora codebase.
>>
>> One alternative could be bring all commons in with all headers and
>> apache namespace changes but still reference published external
>> commons jars on aurora side. Then switch to internal commons and
>> adjust aurora imports as a follow up. That would at least avoid the
>> churn in commons files.
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > +1 for doing it in follow up commit
>> >
>> > On Friday, August 21, 2015, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Jake,
>> >>
>> >> Can the namespace rename be done in a follow up commit? Otherwise the
>> >> review/commit touches every single Java file and becomes very difficult
>> to
>> >> understand.
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org
>> >> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Since the IP has been donated to the ASF the namespace
>> com/twitter/common
>> >> > has to be switch to the Apache namespace org/apache/aurora
>> >> >
>> >> > -Jake
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org
>> >> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > I was able to put up the review for the fork:
>> >> > > https://reviews.apache.org/r/37666/.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Please take a look if you are interested.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Kevin Sweeney <kevints@apache.org
>> >> <javascript:;>>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > +1, I suspect we'll find several things that can be replaced by
>> the
>> >> > Java
>> >> > > 8
>> >> > > > standard library or newer versions of Guava and Guice.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org
>> >> <javascript:;>>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > > Just to be clear, I'm proposing forking the java parts only.
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Joseph Smith <
>> yasumoto7@gmail.com
>> >> <javascript:;>>
>> >> > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > > Also a (tough to concede) +1. Although I’m not a fan of the
>> fork,
>> >> > it
>> >> > > > will
>> >> > > > > > help improve velocity and empower a migration away from
>> twitter
>> >> > > common.
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:15 PM, Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org
>> >> <javascript:;>>
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > That's roughly the eventual plan, which this move would
>> help us
>> >> > > > > > facilitate.
>> >> > > > > > > We use guava heavily already, most of our current
>> dependence is
>> >> > on
>> >> > > ZK
>> >> > > > > > and args handling code...but we would look towards dep-shallow
>> >> > > > > alternatives.
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > _____________________________
>> >> > > > > > > From: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
>> >> > > > > > > Sent: Friday, July 3, 2015 8:03 AM
>> >> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
>> >> > > > > > > To: <dev@aurora.apache.org <javascript:;>>
>> >> > > > > > > Cc: Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>>
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > I'll see what I can do about IP clearance.
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > For giggles, how much work do you think it would be to shed
>> >> > > > > > twitter-commons
>> >> > > > > > > and just rely on guava and other what I would consider more
>> >> > > standard
>> >> > > > > > > libraries.
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Bill Farner <
>> >> wfarner@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks, Jake!
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >> -=Bill
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jake Farrell <
>> >> > jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >>> yes, makes it easier to donate when its Apache License
>> 2.0,
>> >> but
>> >> > > > still
>> >> > > > > > >>> requires the IP clearance [1], which is handled through
>> the
>> >> > IPMC.
>> >> > > > > This
>> >> > > > > > is
>> >> > > > > > >>> required so there is an audit trail of that software being
>> >> > > donated
>> >> > > > to
>> >> > > > > > the
>> >> > > > > > >>> ASF
>> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >>> -Jake
>> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >>> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
>> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Bill Farner <
>> >> > wfarner@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>> Jake - i'm not fully versed on licenses, but is that true
>> >> even
>> >> > > > > though
>> >> > > > > > >>> it's
>> >> > > > > > >>>> all Apache License 2.0?
>> >> > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>> -=Bill
>> >> > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Jake Farrell <
>> >> > > jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >>> wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>> no objections, but we would have to get an IP clearance
>> doc
>> >> > > from
>> >> > > > > > >>> Twitter
>> >> > > > > > >>>>> for this code in order to bring this code into the ASF
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>> -Jake
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Zameer Manji <
>> >> > > zmanji@apache.org <javascript:;>>
>> >> > > > > > >>> wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Hey,
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Aurora depends heavily on twitter-commons for lots of
>> >> > > > > > >> functionality.
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> However upstream is not very active and I suspect that
>> it
>> >> > will
>> >> > > > be
>> >> > > > > > >>> less
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> active in the future. Currently we depend on artifacts
>> >> > > published
>> >> > > > > > >> from
>> >> > > > > > >>>>> this
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> project which causes us to depend on older versions of
>> >> guava
>> >> > > and
>> >> > > > > > >>> guice.
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> As a result, it seems that will be difficult to address
>> >> > > tickets
>> >> > > > > > >> like
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> AURORA-1380 <
>> >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1380>
>> >> > > > > > >>>> without
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> changing something. I propose we fork all of the java
>> >> > portions
>> >> > > > of
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> twitter-commons into our tree, remove the parts we
>> don't
>> >> use
>> >> > > and
>> >> > > > > > >>> update
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> guava and guice so we can move forward on this front.
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> What are people's thoughts on this?
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> --
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Zameer Manji
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > --
>> >> > > > > > > Cheers,
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > Chris Aniszczyk
>> >> > > > > > > http://aniszczyk.org
>> >> > > > > > > +1 512 961 6719
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > --
>> >> > > > > > Zameer Manji
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > <%2B1%20512%20961%206719>
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > --
>> >> > > > Zameer Manji
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Zameer Manji
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>>
>> --
>> Zameer Manji
>>
>>
Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
Posted by Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org>.
Maxim,
I really think it is important to minimize the changes made to the twitter
commons files so one can reference the twitter commons sha bc7248d to see
the history of the files.
I filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1442 to track updating
the copyright headers and moving the files into the namespace.
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Maxim Khutornenko <ma...@apache.org>
wrote:
> I am afraid the upcoming namespace changing sweeper is going to be
> even more monstrous as it will touch all of commons and almost all of
> the aurora codebase.
>
> One alternative could be bring all commons in with all headers and
> apache namespace changes but still reference published external
> commons jars on aurora side. Then switch to internal commons and
> adjust aurora imports as a follow up. That would at least avoid the
> churn in commons files.
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > +1 for doing it in follow up commit
> >
> > On Friday, August 21, 2015, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Jake,
> >>
> >> Can the namespace rename be done in a follow up commit? Otherwise the
> >> review/commit touches every single Java file and becomes very difficult
> to
> >> understand.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org
> >> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Since the IP has been donated to the ASF the namespace
> com/twitter/common
> >> > has to be switch to the Apache namespace org/apache/aurora
> >> >
> >> > -Jake
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org
> >> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > I was able to put up the review for the fork:
> >> > > https://reviews.apache.org/r/37666/.
> >> > >
> >> > > Please take a look if you are interested.
> >> > >
> >> > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Kevin Sweeney <kevints@apache.org
> >> <javascript:;>>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > +1, I suspect we'll find several things that can be replaced by
> the
> >> > Java
> >> > > 8
> >> > > > standard library or newer versions of Guava and Guice.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org
> >> <javascript:;>>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > Just to be clear, I'm proposing forking the java parts only.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Joseph Smith <
> yasumoto7@gmail.com
> >> <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > Also a (tough to concede) +1. Although I’m not a fan of the
> fork,
> >> > it
> >> > > > will
> >> > > > > > help improve velocity and empower a migration away from
> twitter
> >> > > common.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:15 PM, Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org
> >> <javascript:;>>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > That's roughly the eventual plan, which this move would
> help us
> >> > > > > > facilitate.
> >> > > > > > > We use guava heavily already, most of our current
> dependence is
> >> > on
> >> > > ZK
> >> > > > > > and args handling code...but we would look towards dep-shallow
> >> > > > > alternatives.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > _____________________________
> >> > > > > > > From: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > > > Sent: Friday, July 3, 2015 8:03 AM
> >> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
> >> > > > > > > To: <dev@aurora.apache.org <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > > > Cc: Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > I'll see what I can do about IP clearance.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > For giggles, how much work do you think it would be to shed
> >> > > > > > twitter-commons
> >> > > > > > > and just rely on guava and other what I would consider more
> >> > > standard
> >> > > > > > > libraries.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Bill Farner <
> >> wfarner@apache.org <javascript:;>
> >> > >
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >> Thanks, Jake!
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >> -=Bill
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jake Farrell <
> >> > jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >>> yes, makes it easier to donate when its Apache License
> 2.0,
> >> but
> >> > > > still
> >> > > > > > >>> requires the IP clearance [1], which is handled through
> the
> >> > IPMC.
> >> > > > > This
> >> > > > > > is
> >> > > > > > >>> required so there is an audit trail of that software being
> >> > > donated
> >> > > > to
> >> > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > >>> ASF
> >> > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > >>> -Jake
> >> > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > >>> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
> >> > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Bill Farner <
> >> > wfarner@apache.org <javascript:;>
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > >>>> Jake - i'm not fully versed on licenses, but is that true
> >> even
> >> > > > > though
> >> > > > > > >>> it's
> >> > > > > > >>>> all Apache License 2.0?
> >> > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > >>>> -=Bill
> >> > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Jake Farrell <
> >> > > jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > >>>>> no objections, but we would have to get an IP clearance
> doc
> >> > > from
> >> > > > > > >>> Twitter
> >> > > > > > >>>>> for this code in order to bring this code into the ASF
> >> > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > >>>>> -Jake
> >> > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Zameer Manji <
> >> > > zmanji@apache.org <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Hey,
> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Aurora depends heavily on twitter-commons for lots of
> >> > > > > > >> functionality.
> >> > > > > > >>>>>> However upstream is not very active and I suspect that
> it
> >> > will
> >> > > > be
> >> > > > > > >>> less
> >> > > > > > >>>>>> active in the future. Currently we depend on artifacts
> >> > > published
> >> > > > > > >> from
> >> > > > > > >>>>> this
> >> > > > > > >>>>>> project which causes us to depend on older versions of
> >> guava
> >> > > and
> >> > > > > > >>> guice.
> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > >>>>>> As a result, it seems that will be difficult to address
> >> > > tickets
> >> > > > > > >> like
> >> > > > > > >>>>>> AURORA-1380 <
> >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1380>
> >> > > > > > >>>> without
> >> > > > > > >>>>>> changing something. I propose we fork all of the java
> >> > portions
> >> > > > of
> >> > > > > > >>>>>> twitter-commons into our tree, remove the parts we
> don't
> >> use
> >> > > and
> >> > > > > > >>> update
> >> > > > > > >>>>>> guava and guice so we can move forward on this front.
> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > >>>>>> What are people's thoughts on this?
> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > >>>>>> --
> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Zameer Manji
> >> > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > > Cheers,
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Chris Aniszczyk
> >> > > > > > > http://aniszczyk.org
> >> > > > > > > +1 512 961 6719
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > Zameer Manji
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > <%2B1%20512%20961%206719>
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > --
> >> > > > Zameer Manji
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Zameer Manji
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
>
> --
> Zameer Manji
>
>
Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
Posted by Maxim Khutornenko <ma...@apache.org>.
I am afraid the upcoming namespace changing sweeper is going to be
even more monstrous as it will touch all of commons and almost all of
the aurora codebase.
One alternative could be bring all commons in with all headers and
apache namespace changes but still reference published external
commons jars on aurora side. Then switch to internal commons and
adjust aurora imports as a follow up. That would at least avoid the
churn in commons files.
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 for doing it in follow up commit
>
> On Friday, August 21, 2015, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Jake,
>>
>> Can the namespace rename be done in a follow up commit? Otherwise the
>> review/commit touches every single Java file and becomes very difficult to
>> understand.
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org
>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>>
>> > Since the IP has been donated to the ASF the namespace com/twitter/common
>> > has to be switch to the Apache namespace org/apache/aurora
>> >
>> > -Jake
>> >
>> > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org
>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > I was able to put up the review for the fork:
>> > > https://reviews.apache.org/r/37666/.
>> > >
>> > > Please take a look if you are interested.
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Kevin Sweeney <kevints@apache.org
>> <javascript:;>>
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > +1, I suspect we'll find several things that can be replaced by the
>> > Java
>> > > 8
>> > > > standard library or newer versions of Guava and Guice.
>> > > >
>> > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org
>> <javascript:;>>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Just to be clear, I'm proposing forking the java parts only.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Joseph Smith <yasumoto7@gmail.com
>> <javascript:;>>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Also a (tough to concede) +1. Although I’m not a fan of the fork,
>> > it
>> > > > will
>> > > > > > help improve velocity and empower a migration away from twitter
>> > > common.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:15 PM, Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org
>> <javascript:;>>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > That's roughly the eventual plan, which this move would help us
>> > > > > > facilitate.
>> > > > > > > We use guava heavily already, most of our current dependence is
>> > on
>> > > ZK
>> > > > > > and args handling code...but we would look towards dep-shallow
>> > > > > alternatives.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > _____________________________
>> > > > > > > From: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
>> > > > > > > Sent: Friday, July 3, 2015 8:03 AM
>> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
>> > > > > > > To: <dev@aurora.apache.org <javascript:;>>
>> > > > > > > Cc: Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>>
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I'll see what I can do about IP clearance.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > For giggles, how much work do you think it would be to shed
>> > > > > > twitter-commons
>> > > > > > > and just rely on guava and other what I would consider more
>> > > standard
>> > > > > > > libraries.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Bill Farner <
>> wfarner@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> > >
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> Thanks, Jake!
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> -=Bill
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jake Farrell <
>> > jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> > > >
>> > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >>> yes, makes it easier to donate when its Apache License 2.0,
>> but
>> > > > still
>> > > > > > >>> requires the IP clearance [1], which is handled through the
>> > IPMC.
>> > > > > This
>> > > > > > is
>> > > > > > >>> required so there is an audit trail of that software being
>> > > donated
>> > > > to
>> > > > > > the
>> > > > > > >>> ASF
>> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > >>> -Jake
>> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > >>> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
>> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Bill Farner <
>> > wfarner@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> > > >
>> > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > >>>> Jake - i'm not fully versed on licenses, but is that true
>> even
>> > > > > though
>> > > > > > >>> it's
>> > > > > > >>>> all Apache License 2.0?
>> > > > > > >>>>
>> > > > > > >>>> -=Bill
>> > > > > > >>>>
>> > > > > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Jake Farrell <
>> > > jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > >>> wrote:
>> > > > > > >>>>
>> > > > > > >>>>> no objections, but we would have to get an IP clearance doc
>> > > from
>> > > > > > >>> Twitter
>> > > > > > >>>>> for this code in order to bring this code into the ASF
>> > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > >>>>> -Jake
>> > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Zameer Manji <
>> > > zmanji@apache.org <javascript:;>>
>> > > > > > >>> wrote:
>> > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > >>>>>> Hey,
>> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > >>>>>> Aurora depends heavily on twitter-commons for lots of
>> > > > > > >> functionality.
>> > > > > > >>>>>> However upstream is not very active and I suspect that it
>> > will
>> > > > be
>> > > > > > >>> less
>> > > > > > >>>>>> active in the future. Currently we depend on artifacts
>> > > published
>> > > > > > >> from
>> > > > > > >>>>> this
>> > > > > > >>>>>> project which causes us to depend on older versions of
>> guava
>> > > and
>> > > > > > >>> guice.
>> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > >>>>>> As a result, it seems that will be difficult to address
>> > > tickets
>> > > > > > >> like
>> > > > > > >>>>>> AURORA-1380 <
>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1380>
>> > > > > > >>>> without
>> > > > > > >>>>>> changing something. I propose we fork all of the java
>> > portions
>> > > > of
>> > > > > > >>>>>> twitter-commons into our tree, remove the parts we don't
>> use
>> > > and
>> > > > > > >>> update
>> > > > > > >>>>>> guava and guice so we can move forward on this front.
>> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > >>>>>> What are people's thoughts on this?
>> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > >>>>>> --
>> > > > > > >>>>>> Zameer Manji
>> > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > >>>>
>> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > Cheers,
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Chris Aniszczyk
>> > > > > > > http://aniszczyk.org
>> > > > > > > +1 512 961 6719
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > Zameer Manji
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > <%2B1%20512%20961%206719>
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Zameer Manji
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Zameer Manji
>> >
>> >
>>
Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
Posted by Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>.
+1 for doing it in follow up commit
On Friday, August 21, 2015, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
> Jake,
>
> Can the namespace rename be done in a follow up commit? Otherwise the
> review/commit touches every single Java file and becomes very difficult to
> understand.
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>
> > Since the IP has been donated to the ASF the namespace com/twitter/common
> > has to be switch to the Apache namespace org/apache/aurora
> >
> > -Jake
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > > I was able to put up the review for the fork:
> > > https://reviews.apache.org/r/37666/.
> > >
> > > Please take a look if you are interested.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Kevin Sweeney <kevints@apache.org
> <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1, I suspect we'll find several things that can be replaced by the
> > Java
> > > 8
> > > > standard library or newer versions of Guava and Guice.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org
> <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Just to be clear, I'm proposing forking the java parts only.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Joseph Smith <yasumoto7@gmail.com
> <javascript:;>>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Also a (tough to concede) +1. Although I’m not a fan of the fork,
> > it
> > > > will
> > > > > > help improve velocity and empower a migration away from twitter
> > > common.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:15 PM, Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org
> <javascript:;>>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That's roughly the eventual plan, which this move would help us
> > > > > > facilitate.
> > > > > > > We use guava heavily already, most of our current dependence is
> > on
> > > ZK
> > > > > > and args handling code...but we would look towards dep-shallow
> > > > > alternatives.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _____________________________
> > > > > > > From: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> > > > > > > Sent: Friday, July 3, 2015 8:03 AM
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
> > > > > > > To: <dev@aurora.apache.org <javascript:;>>
> > > > > > > Cc: Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'll see what I can do about IP clearance.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For giggles, how much work do you think it would be to shed
> > > > > > twitter-commons
> > > > > > > and just rely on guava and other what I would consider more
> > > standard
> > > > > > > libraries.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Bill Farner <
> wfarner@apache.org <javascript:;>
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Thanks, Jake!
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> -=Bill
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jake Farrell <
> > jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> yes, makes it easier to donate when its Apache License 2.0,
> but
> > > > still
> > > > > > >>> requires the IP clearance [1], which is handled through the
> > IPMC.
> > > > > This
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > >>> required so there is an audit trail of that software being
> > > donated
> > > > to
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > >>> ASF
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> -Jake
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Bill Farner <
> > wfarner@apache.org <javascript:;>
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>> Jake - i'm not fully versed on licenses, but is that true
> even
> > > > > though
> > > > > > >>> it's
> > > > > > >>>> all Apache License 2.0?
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> -=Bill
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Jake Farrell <
> > > jfarrell@apache.org <javascript:;>
> > > > >
> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> no objections, but we would have to get an IP clearance doc
> > > from
> > > > > > >>> Twitter
> > > > > > >>>>> for this code in order to bring this code into the ASF
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> -Jake
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Zameer Manji <
> > > zmanji@apache.org <javascript:;>>
> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> Hey,
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> Aurora depends heavily on twitter-commons for lots of
> > > > > > >> functionality.
> > > > > > >>>>>> However upstream is not very active and I suspect that it
> > will
> > > > be
> > > > > > >>> less
> > > > > > >>>>>> active in the future. Currently we depend on artifacts
> > > published
> > > > > > >> from
> > > > > > >>>>> this
> > > > > > >>>>>> project which causes us to depend on older versions of
> guava
> > > and
> > > > > > >>> guice.
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> As a result, it seems that will be difficult to address
> > > tickets
> > > > > > >> like
> > > > > > >>>>>> AURORA-1380 <
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1380>
> > > > > > >>>> without
> > > > > > >>>>>> changing something. I propose we fork all of the java
> > portions
> > > > of
> > > > > > >>>>>> twitter-commons into our tree, remove the parts we don't
> use
> > > and
> > > > > > >>> update
> > > > > > >>>>>> guava and guice so we can move forward on this front.
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> What are people's thoughts on this?
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > > > >>>>>> Zameer Manji
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Chris Aniszczyk
> > > > > > > http://aniszczyk.org
> > > > > > > +1 512 961 6719
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Zameer Manji
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <%2B1%20512%20961%206719>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Zameer Manji
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Zameer Manji
> >
> >
>
Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
Posted by Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org>.
Jake,
Can the namespace rename be done in a follow up commit? Otherwise the
review/commit touches every single Java file and becomes very difficult to
understand.
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org> wrote:
> Since the IP has been donated to the ASF the namespace com/twitter/common
> has to be switch to the Apache namespace org/apache/aurora
>
> -Jake
>
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I was able to put up the review for the fork:
> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/37666/.
> >
> > Please take a look if you are interested.
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Kevin Sweeney <ke...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > +1, I suspect we'll find several things that can be replaced by the
> Java
> > 8
> > > standard library or newer versions of Guava and Guice.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Just to be clear, I'm proposing forking the java parts only.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Joseph Smith <ya...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Also a (tough to concede) +1. Although I’m not a fan of the fork,
> it
> > > will
> > > > > help improve velocity and empower a migration away from twitter
> > common.
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:15 PM, Bill Farner <wf...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's roughly the eventual plan, which this move would help us
> > > > > facilitate.
> > > > > > We use guava heavily already, most of our current dependence is
> on
> > ZK
> > > > > and args handling code...but we would look towards dep-shallow
> > > > alternatives.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _____________________________
> > > > > > From: Chris Aniszczyk <ca...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, July 3, 2015 8:03 AM
> > > > > > Subject: Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
> > > > > > To: <de...@aurora.apache.org>
> > > > > > Cc: Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'll see what I can do about IP clearance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For giggles, how much work do you think it would be to shed
> > > > > twitter-commons
> > > > > > and just rely on guava and other what I would consider more
> > standard
> > > > > > libraries.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Thanks, Jake!
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> -=Bill
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jake Farrell <
> jfarrell@apache.org
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> yes, makes it easier to donate when its Apache License 2.0, but
> > > still
> > > > > >>> requires the IP clearance [1], which is handled through the
> IPMC.
> > > > This
> > > > > is
> > > > > >>> required so there is an audit trail of that software being
> > donated
> > > to
> > > > > the
> > > > > >>> ASF
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> -Jake
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Bill Farner <
> wfarner@apache.org
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>> Jake - i'm not fully versed on licenses, but is that true even
> > > > though
> > > > > >>> it's
> > > > > >>>> all Apache License 2.0?
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> -=Bill
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Jake Farrell <
> > jfarrell@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>> no objections, but we would have to get an IP clearance doc
> > from
> > > > > >>> Twitter
> > > > > >>>>> for this code in order to bring this code into the ASF
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> -Jake
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Zameer Manji <
> > zmanji@apache.org>
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Hey,
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Aurora depends heavily on twitter-commons for lots of
> > > > > >> functionality.
> > > > > >>>>>> However upstream is not very active and I suspect that it
> will
> > > be
> > > > > >>> less
> > > > > >>>>>> active in the future. Currently we depend on artifacts
> > published
> > > > > >> from
> > > > > >>>>> this
> > > > > >>>>>> project which causes us to depend on older versions of guava
> > and
> > > > > >>> guice.
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> As a result, it seems that will be difficult to address
> > tickets
> > > > > >> like
> > > > > >>>>>> AURORA-1380 <
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1380>
> > > > > >>>> without
> > > > > >>>>>> changing something. I propose we fork all of the java
> portions
> > > of
> > > > > >>>>>> twitter-commons into our tree, remove the parts we don't use
> > and
> > > > > >>> update
> > > > > >>>>>> guava and guice so we can move forward on this front.
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> What are people's thoughts on this?
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > > >>>>>> Zameer Manji
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Chris Aniszczyk
> > > > > > http://aniszczyk.org
> > > > > > +1 512 961 6719
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Zameer Manji
> > > > >
> > > > > <%2B1%20512%20961%206719>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Zameer Manji
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> --
> Zameer Manji
>
>
Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
Posted by Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>.
Since the IP has been donated to the ASF the namespace com/twitter/common
has to be switch to the Apache namespace org/apache/aurora
-Jake
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
> I was able to put up the review for the fork:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/37666/.
>
> Please take a look if you are interested.
>
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Kevin Sweeney <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > +1, I suspect we'll find several things that can be replaced by the Java
> 8
> > standard library or newer versions of Guava and Guice.
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Zameer Manji <zm...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Just to be clear, I'm proposing forking the java parts only.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Joseph Smith <ya...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Also a (tough to concede) +1. Although I’m not a fan of the fork, it
> > will
> > > > help improve velocity and empower a migration away from twitter
> common.
> > > >
> > > > > On Jul 3, 2015, at 8:15 PM, Bill Farner <wf...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > That's roughly the eventual plan, which this move would help us
> > > > facilitate.
> > > > > We use guava heavily already, most of our current dependence is on
> ZK
> > > > and args handling code...but we would look towards dep-shallow
> > > alternatives.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _____________________________
> > > > > From: Chris Aniszczyk <ca...@gmail.com>
> > > > > Sent: Friday, July 3, 2015 8:03 AM
> > > > > Subject: Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
> > > > > To: <de...@aurora.apache.org>
> > > > > Cc: Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll see what I can do about IP clearance.
> > > > >
> > > > > For giggles, how much work do you think it would be to shed
> > > > twitter-commons
> > > > > and just rely on guava and other what I would consider more
> standard
> > > > > libraries.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Bill Farner <wf...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Thanks, Jake!
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -=Bill
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> yes, makes it easier to donate when its Apache License 2.0, but
> > still
> > > > >>> requires the IP clearance [1], which is handled through the IPMC.
> > > This
> > > > is
> > > > >>> required so there is an audit trail of that software being
> donated
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > >>> ASF
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> -Jake
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> Jake - i'm not fully versed on licenses, but is that true even
> > > though
> > > > >>> it's
> > > > >>>> all Apache License 2.0?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> -=Bill
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Jake Farrell <
> jfarrell@apache.org
> > >
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> no objections, but we would have to get an IP clearance doc
> from
> > > > >>> Twitter
> > > > >>>>> for this code in order to bring this code into the ASF
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> -Jake
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Zameer Manji <
> zmanji@apache.org>
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Hey,
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Aurora depends heavily on twitter-commons for lots of
> > > > >> functionality.
> > > > >>>>>> However upstream is not very active and I suspect that it will
> > be
> > > > >>> less
> > > > >>>>>> active in the future. Currently we depend on artifacts
> published
> > > > >> from
> > > > >>>>> this
> > > > >>>>>> project which causes us to depend on older versions of guava
> and
> > > > >>> guice.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> As a result, it seems that will be difficult to address
> tickets
> > > > >> like
> > > > >>>>>> AURORA-1380 <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1380>
> > > > >>>> without
> > > > >>>>>> changing something. I propose we fork all of the java portions
> > of
> > > > >>>>>> twitter-commons into our tree, remove the parts we don't use
> and
> > > > >>> update
> > > > >>>>>> guava and guice so we can move forward on this front.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> What are people's thoughts on this?
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > >>>>>> Zameer Manji
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > >
> > > > > Chris Aniszczyk
> > > > > http://aniszczyk.org
> > > > > +1 512 961 6719
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Zameer Manji
> > > >
> > > > <%2B1%20512%20961%206719>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Zameer Manji
> >
> >
>