You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org by Davide Giannella <da...@apache.org> on 2015/12/10 11:38:08 UTC
Re: oak-run 50MB
On 22/07/2015 10:23, Davide Giannella wrote:
> On 20/07/2015 14:12, Julian Sedding wrote:
>> +1 It sounds sensible to split this up. It seems that it has evolved
>> into a collection of functionality that shares mostly the fact that
>> they are run on the command line. I would like to see the logic used
>> to bootstrap various Oak setups based on command line parameters to be
>> extracted and re-used.
> I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3134 to keep
> track of an initial investigation.
>
> Can I ask everyone to jump on it adding their own knowledge and suggestions?
>
As we're speaking of modularisation I'm reviving this thread. Please
see the ticket https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3134 for details.
I will file separate tickets for the actual actions, around moving each
individual functionality to own bundle if no one will object.
Cheers
Davide
Re: oak-run 50MB
Posted by Davide Giannella <da...@apache.org>.
On 11/12/2015 07:29, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could we get rid of unused stuff? Like Hadoop (7 MB!). Do we need Solr
> (2.3 MB), Tika, Zookeeper, Jetty, H2 (the SQL part)? Do we need the
> Jackrabbit remoting stuff? I guess we need Groovy (4 MB) and Lucene (4 MB).
>
> Of those 50MB, just 8% is Oak, and the rest is dependencies.
>
thanks for the investigation Thomas. Filed
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3766.
IMO if the dependency is not used, simply remove it. It can be added
later on if there will be the need.
Cheers
Davide
Re: oak-run 50MB
Posted by Davide Giannella <da...@apache.org>.
On 11/12/2015 09:31, Michael Dürig wrote:
>
>
> +1, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2847.
I've turned OAK-2847 into Epic and moved OAK-3766 as actual action of
it. We have to decide when we want to do this :)
Davide
Re: oak-run 50MB
Posted by Michael Dürig <md...@apache.org>.
On 11.12.15 8:29 , Thomas Mueller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could we get rid of unused stuff? Like Hadoop (7 MB!). Do we need Solr
> (2.3 MB), Tika, Zookeeper, Jetty, H2 (the SQL part)? Do we need the
> Jackrabbit remoting stuff? I guess we need Groovy (4 MB) and Lucene (4 MB).
>
> Of those 50MB, just 8% is Oak, and the rest is dependencies.
+1, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2847.
Michael
>
>
> Regards,
> Thomas
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10/12/15 11:38, "Davide Giannella" <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 22/07/2015 10:23, Davide Giannella wrote:
>>> On 20/07/2015 14:12, Julian Sedding wrote:
>>>> +1 It sounds sensible to split this up. It seems that it has evolved
>>>> into a collection of functionality that shares mostly the fact that
>>>> they are run on the command line. I would like to see the logic used
>>>> to bootstrap various Oak setups based on command line parameters to be
>>>> extracted and re-used.
>>> I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3134 to keep
>>> track of an initial investigation.
>>>
>>> Can I ask everyone to jump on it adding their own knowledge and
>>> suggestions?
>>>
>>
>> As we're speaking of modularisation I'm reviving this thread. Please
>> see the ticket https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3134 for details.
>>
>> I will file separate tickets for the actual actions, around moving each
>> individual functionality to own bundle if no one will object.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Davide
>>
>>
>
Re: oak-run 50MB
Posted by Thomas Mueller <mu...@adobe.com>.
Hi,
Could we get rid of unused stuff? Like Hadoop (7 MB!). Do we need Solr
(2.3 MB), Tika, Zookeeper, Jetty, H2 (the SQL part)? Do we need the
Jackrabbit remoting stuff? I guess we need Groovy (4 MB) and Lucene (4 MB).
Of those 50MB, just 8% is Oak, and the rest is dependencies.
Regards,
Thomas
On 10/12/15 11:38, "Davide Giannella" <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>On 22/07/2015 10:23, Davide Giannella wrote:
>> On 20/07/2015 14:12, Julian Sedding wrote:
>>> +1 It sounds sensible to split this up. It seems that it has evolved
>>> into a collection of functionality that shares mostly the fact that
>>> they are run on the command line. I would like to see the logic used
>>> to bootstrap various Oak setups based on command line parameters to be
>>> extracted and re-used.
>> I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3134 to keep
>> track of an initial investigation.
>>
>> Can I ask everyone to jump on it adding their own knowledge and
>>suggestions?
>>
>
>As we're speaking of modularisation I'm reviving this thread. Please
>see the ticket https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3134 for details.
>
>I will file separate tickets for the actual actions, around moving each
>individual functionality to own bundle if no one will object.
>
>Cheers
>Davide
>
>
Re: oak-run 50MB
Posted by Davide Giannella <da...@apache.org>.
On 11/12/2015 09:30, Michael Dürig wrote:
> >...I will file separate tickets for the actual actions, around moving
> each
>> individual functionality to own bundle if no one will object.
>
> +1, good having someone driving this.
Please all, have a look at
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3134 and children tickets for
individual actions. Amend as needed if you see it fits.
One questions left on the topic: shall we remove/deprecate the "Server"
functionality? Is there anyone using it?
Cheers
Davide
Re: oak-run 50MB
Posted by Michael Dürig <md...@apache.org>.
On 10.12.15 11:38 , Davide Giannella wrote:
> On 22/07/2015 10:23, Davide Giannella wrote:
>> On 20/07/2015 14:12, Julian Sedding wrote:
>>> +1 It sounds sensible to split this up. It seems that it has evolved
>>> into a collection of functionality that shares mostly the fact that
>>> they are run on the command line. I would like to see the logic used
>>> to bootstrap various Oak setups based on command line parameters to be
>>> extracted and re-used.
>> I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3134 to keep
>> track of an initial investigation.
>>
>> Can I ask everyone to jump on it adding their own knowledge and suggestions?
>>
>
> As we're speaking of modularisation I'm reviving this thread. Please
> see the ticket https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3134 for details.
>
> I will file separate tickets for the actual actions, around moving each
> individual functionality to own bundle if no one will object.
+1, good having someone driving this.
Michael
>
> Cheers
> Davide
>
>