[SUGGESTION] Jute's place in the new directory structure

[Norbert Kalmar <nk...@cloudera.com.INVALID>]

Hi folks,

So jute is a little bit the odd one out in ZooKeeper. It was pulled out of
Hadoop and it evolved independently since with ZooKeeper. And it has its
own namespace in ZK: org.apache.jute beside org.apache.zookeeper.

For me, this is a bit odd, it suggests its a top level apache project.
The original plan in the maven migration was to move jute to simply in a
"jute" top level directory in zookeeper. Like this:


zookeeper | -bin | -conf | -jute | -zookeeper-client | -zookeeper-contrib |
-zookeeper-docs | -zookeeper-it (integration tests) | -zookeeper-server |
-zookeeper-recipes

But this just seems a bit strange to me. I was thinking of possibly moving
into recipes, but then again, I ended up thinking it could still get its
own top level directory, but with the name "zookeeper-jute", as this
particular project is only used by ZooKeeper (of course I would keep the
package name intact).

What do you think?
As this is a change that was not in the initial doc about maven migration,
I thought it's best to ask.

Regards,
Norbert

p.s.: The best thing would be to use a more standardized library for
serialization like protobuf or Avro. But that's just a distant dream right
now, maybe ZooKeeper v5.0 ;)

Re: [SUGGESTION] Jute's place in the new directory structure

[Norbert Kalmar <nk...@cloudera.com.INVALID>]

Hi Michael,

Yes, there is a plan to have one more step, which will introduce
zookeeper-server and zookeeper-common top level directory, and
zookeeper-client-java under zookeeper-client.
See ZOOKEEPER-3032 for an outlined final structure.

Regards,
Norbert

On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:15 PM Michael Han <ha...@apache.org> wrote:

> +1 for zookeeper-jute.
>
> A side question since we are at this - are there going to be more top level
> folders that maps to current source structure- such as zookeeper-common,
> zookeeper-cli, etc?
>
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 3:09 PM, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Il mar 28 ago 2018, 23:37 Brian Nixon <br...@gmail.com> ha
> > scritto:
> >
> > > I still think it makes sense to keep it as a top level directory (would
> > not
> > > include it in recipes). 'zookeeper-jute' is certainly a reasonable
> name.
> > :)
> > >
> >
> > +1 for zookeeper-jute
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> >
> > > -Brian
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 7:59 AM Norbert Kalmar
> > > <nk...@cloudera.com.invalid>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi folks,
> > > >
> > > > So jute is a little bit the odd one out in ZooKeeper. It was pulled
> out
> > > of
> > > > Hadoop and it evolved independently since with ZooKeeper. And it has
> > its
> > > > own namespace in ZK: org.apache.jute beside org.apache.zookeeper.
> > > >
> > > > For me, this is a bit odd, it suggests its a top level apache
> project.
> > > > The original plan in the maven migration was to move jute to simply
> in
> > a
> > > > "jute" top level directory in zookeeper. Like this:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > zookeeper | -bin | -conf | -jute | -zookeeper-client |
> > > -zookeeper-contrib |
> > > > -zookeeper-docs | -zookeeper-it (integration tests) |
> > -zookeeper-server |
> > > > -zookeeper-recipes
> > > >
> > > > But this just seems a bit strange to me. I was thinking of possibly
> > > moving
> > > > into recipes, but then again, I ended up thinking it could still get
> > its
> > > > own top level directory, but with the name "zookeeper-jute", as this
> > > > particular project is only used by ZooKeeper (of course I would keep
> > the
> > > > package name intact).
> > > >
> > > > What do you think?
> > > > As this is a change that was not in the initial doc about maven
> > > migration,
> > > > I thought it's best to ask.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Norbert
> > > >
> > > > p.s.: The best thing would be to use a more standardized library for
> > > > serialization like protobuf or Avro. But that's just a distant dream
> > > right
> > > > now, maybe ZooKeeper v5.0 ;)
> > > >
> > >
> > --
> >
> >
> > -- Enrico Olivelli
> >
>

Re: [SUGGESTION] Jute's place in the new directory structure

[Michael Han <ha...@apache.org>]

+1 for zookeeper-jute.

A side question since we are at this - are there going to be more top level
folders that maps to current source structure- such as zookeeper-common,
zookeeper-cli, etc?

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 3:09 PM, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Il mar 28 ago 2018, 23:37 Brian Nixon <br...@gmail.com> ha
> scritto:
>
> > I still think it makes sense to keep it as a top level directory (would
> not
> > include it in recipes). 'zookeeper-jute' is certainly a reasonable name.
> :)
> >
>
> +1 for zookeeper-jute
>
> Enrico
>
>
> > -Brian
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 7:59 AM Norbert Kalmar
> > <nk...@cloudera.com.invalid>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > So jute is a little bit the odd one out in ZooKeeper. It was pulled out
> > of
> > > Hadoop and it evolved independently since with ZooKeeper. And it has
> its
> > > own namespace in ZK: org.apache.jute beside org.apache.zookeeper.
> > >
> > > For me, this is a bit odd, it suggests its a top level apache project.
> > > The original plan in the maven migration was to move jute to simply in
> a
> > > "jute" top level directory in zookeeper. Like this:
> > >
> > >
> > > zookeeper | -bin | -conf | -jute | -zookeeper-client |
> > -zookeeper-contrib |
> > > -zookeeper-docs | -zookeeper-it (integration tests) |
> -zookeeper-server |
> > > -zookeeper-recipes
> > >
> > > But this just seems a bit strange to me. I was thinking of possibly
> > moving
> > > into recipes, but then again, I ended up thinking it could still get
> its
> > > own top level directory, but with the name "zookeeper-jute", as this
> > > particular project is only used by ZooKeeper (of course I would keep
> the
> > > package name intact).
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > > As this is a change that was not in the initial doc about maven
> > migration,
> > > I thought it's best to ask.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Norbert
> > >
> > > p.s.: The best thing would be to use a more standardized library for
> > > serialization like protobuf or Avro. But that's just a distant dream
> > right
> > > now, maybe ZooKeeper v5.0 ;)
> > >
> >
> --
>
>
> -- Enrico Olivelli
>

Re: [SUGGESTION] Jute's place in the new directory structure

[Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>]

Il mar 28 ago 2018, 23:37 Brian Nixon <br...@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> I still think it makes sense to keep it as a top level directory (would not
> include it in recipes). 'zookeeper-jute' is certainly a reasonable name. :)
>

+1 for zookeeper-jute

Enrico


> -Brian
>
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 7:59 AM Norbert Kalmar
> <nk...@cloudera.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > So jute is a little bit the odd one out in ZooKeeper. It was pulled out
> of
> > Hadoop and it evolved independently since with ZooKeeper. And it has its
> > own namespace in ZK: org.apache.jute beside org.apache.zookeeper.
> >
> > For me, this is a bit odd, it suggests its a top level apache project.
> > The original plan in the maven migration was to move jute to simply in a
> > "jute" top level directory in zookeeper. Like this:
> >
> >
> > zookeeper | -bin | -conf | -jute | -zookeeper-client |
> -zookeeper-contrib |
> > -zookeeper-docs | -zookeeper-it (integration tests) | -zookeeper-server |
> > -zookeeper-recipes
> >
> > But this just seems a bit strange to me. I was thinking of possibly
> moving
> > into recipes, but then again, I ended up thinking it could still get its
> > own top level directory, but with the name "zookeeper-jute", as this
> > particular project is only used by ZooKeeper (of course I would keep the
> > package name intact).
> >
> > What do you think?
> > As this is a change that was not in the initial doc about maven
> migration,
> > I thought it's best to ask.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Norbert
> >
> > p.s.: The best thing would be to use a more standardized library for
> > serialization like protobuf or Avro. But that's just a distant dream
> right
> > now, maybe ZooKeeper v5.0 ;)
> >
>
-- 


-- Enrico Olivelli

Re: [SUGGESTION] Jute's place in the new directory structure

[Brian Nixon <br...@gmail.com>]

I still think it makes sense to keep it as a top level directory (would not
include it in recipes). 'zookeeper-jute' is certainly a reasonable name. :)

-Brian

On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 7:59 AM Norbert Kalmar <nk...@cloudera.com.invalid>
wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> So jute is a little bit the odd one out in ZooKeeper. It was pulled out of
> Hadoop and it evolved independently since with ZooKeeper. And it has its
> own namespace in ZK: org.apache.jute beside org.apache.zookeeper.
>
> For me, this is a bit odd, it suggests its a top level apache project.
> The original plan in the maven migration was to move jute to simply in a
> "jute" top level directory in zookeeper. Like this:
>
>
> zookeeper | -bin | -conf | -jute | -zookeeper-client | -zookeeper-contrib |
> -zookeeper-docs | -zookeeper-it (integration tests) | -zookeeper-server |
> -zookeeper-recipes
>
> But this just seems a bit strange to me. I was thinking of possibly moving
> into recipes, but then again, I ended up thinking it could still get its
> own top level directory, but with the name "zookeeper-jute", as this
> particular project is only used by ZooKeeper (of course I would keep the
> package name intact).
>
> What do you think?
> As this is a change that was not in the initial doc about maven migration,
> I thought it's best to ask.
>
> Regards,
> Norbert
>
> p.s.: The best thing would be to use a more standardized library for
> serialization like protobuf or Avro. But that's just a distant dream right
> now, maybe ZooKeeper v5.0 ;)
>