Modularity vs ...

[Eric Charles <er...@apache.org>]

Hi,

Just noticed Branko comment on general incubator mailinglist [1] which 
makes sense to me if I take the position of an external reviewer.

As stated before, I am convinced that we must provide small, modular 
modules.

However, I just want to ensure that we don't finish at the end with so 
many micro modules that reviewer and users don't take time to become 
they could think they are too fragmented.

In the particular case of the incubator vote, we should provided the 
link to the source jar.

For my particular use case, I hope the future 'all' module I would like 
to use will for example provide transparently the src-jar so when I 
browse in Eclipse, I have the source automatically downloaded from the 
repo and can see it in the editor.

Thx, Eric


[1] 
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201302.mbox/%3C510D82CF.7020706%40apache.org%3E

Re: Modularity vs ...

[Eric Charles <er...@apache.org>]

On 04/02/2013 05:07, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 8:10 AM, Eric Charles <er...@apache.org> wrote:
>> As stated before, I am convinced that we must provide small, modular
>> modules.
>
> +1
>
>> However, I just want to ensure that we don't finish at the end with so many
>> micro modules that reviewer and users don't take time to become they could
>> think they are too fragmented.
>
> Currently I only think on the users. In future (I mean after
> graduation) we will be our own reviewers and well, we have to deal
> with our own things then. I would like to build packages which make
> technical sense, not ones which is easy to vote on (if both can be
> achieved, good).
>
> Actually we should think in this case if it makes sense to make jar
> files for a single class. Or if we should just provide a single jar.
>

+1

When I said 'reviewer' or 'user', I meant 'non-onami-developer'.
I must makes technical sense to make a jar, but IMHO it must also makes 
sense to *all* 'non-onami-developer'.

Thx, Eric

>> In the particular case of the incubator vote, we should provided the link to
>> the source jar.
>>
>> For my particular use case, I hope the future 'all' module I would like to
>> use will for example provide transparently the src-jar so when I browse in
>> Eclipse, I have the source automatically downloaded from the repo and can
>> see it in the editor.
>
> +1
>
>>
>> Thx, Eric
>>
>>
>> [1]
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201302.mbox/%3C510D82CF.7020706%40apache.org%3E
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.grobmeier.de
> https://www.timeandbill.de
>

Re: Modularity vs ...

[Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org>]

Hi all,

and sorry for the late reply, I've been travelling outside Italy and
didn't have an Internet connection!

> Currently I only think on the users.
> In future (I mean after
> graduation) we will be our own reviewers and well, we have to deal
> with our own things then. I would like to build packages which make
> technical sense, not ones which is easy to vote on (if both can be
> achieved, good).
>

*best*quote*ever*, couldn't agree more!

> Actually we should think in this case if it makes sense to make jar
> files for a single class. Or if we should just provide a single jar.

what about supporting both? I mean, nothing prevents having small
micro-modules AND a big fat-package.

Some other Onami modules could be affected by the same "issue", like
SPI, where we can identify a core module, which provide the SPI
discovery engine, the Services discovery module and the Guice Module
loader: actually the source are all merged in a single module, but
nothing prevents us distributing them as mini-modules AND the fat jar.

Let me do an experiment on the sandbox as soon as I have some spare
time in order to prove that this is something we can achieve, then
we'll evaluate.

Thanks all a lot for the feedbacks!
-Simo

http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
http://www.99soft.org/

Re: Modularity vs ...

[Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 8:10 AM, Eric Charles <er...@apache.org> wrote:
> As stated before, I am convinced that we must provide small, modular
> modules.

+1

> However, I just want to ensure that we don't finish at the end with so many
> micro modules that reviewer and users don't take time to become they could
> think they are too fragmented.

Currently I only think on the users. In future (I mean after
graduation) we will be our own reviewers and well, we have to deal
with our own things then. I would like to build packages which make
technical sense, not ones which is easy to vote on (if both can be
achieved, good).

Actually we should think in this case if it makes sense to make jar
files for a single class. Or if we should just provide a single jar.

> In the particular case of the incubator vote, we should provided the link to
> the source jar.
>
> For my particular use case, I hope the future 'all' module I would like to
> use will for example provide transparently the src-jar so when I browse in
> Eclipse, I have the source automatically downloaded from the repo and can
> see it in the editor.

+1

>
> Thx, Eric
>
>
> [1]
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201302.mbox/%3C510D82CF.7020706%40apache.org%3E



--
http://www.grobmeier.de
https://www.timeandbill.de