You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@iotdb.apache.org by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> on 2024/04/11 08:34:59 UTC

Splitting up the repos

Hi all,

so now that the new repo is created (https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/iotdb-extras.git, but please don’t push anything there just yet), we would need to decide on which parts should be moved there.

* “distribution”: Here I think we need to split the distribution. Keeping the distributions containing only core in the main repo and adding a new distribution module in the extras repo, that contains the downstream components.
* “example” (which I would propose to rename to examples as it contains multiple)
* “iotdb-connector”

As it seems that in the integration-tests there are no tests testing the connectors, I guess we can leave that as it is.

Now the problem is: There are multiple options to split up the repo and keeping the entire history.

1. Split out one directory in a separate branch and then merge all branches into an empty new one
2. Use the filter plugin to strip out all commits that match a regexp
3. Simply ignore the history, copy the files to the new repo and delete them from the old.

3 is the simples, but the person doing the move will be marked as author. In general this is not that problematic, as the integration modules and the examples are usually not that complex, but I would understand, if people wanted to keep the history.

Option 1 is probably the most work, but the most robust option, as with option 2, I had to give up when doing the PLC4X split as there were bugs and issues in the tooling.

So, if nobody objects and we’ve decided on what should be moved, I personally would opt for option 3.

Chris

答复: Splitting up the repos

Posted by Wang Critas <cr...@outlook.com>.

+1 for Only iotdb-connector need to be moved

发件人: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
日期: 星期一, 2024年4月15日 17:20
收件人: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
主题: Re: Splitting up the repos
Hi,

1. Which Parts: Only iotdb-connector need to be moved,  distribution
and examples will impact the release and users.
2. How to split up:  I prefer【Simply ignore the history, copy the
files to the new repo and delete them from the old】.

Jialin Qiao

Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 16:27写道：
>
> Hi all,
>
>
> So, I’ve set a tag on the main repository “before-moving-extras” (https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fiotdb%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Fbefore-moving-extras&data=05%7C02%7C%7Caca8308b666943558e9808dc5d2d4199%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638487696171565100%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=jGQ3969ei%2BQ5f5UhFAnl%2FyNEg%2BJXWvspE61lIkM74Wc%3D&reserved=0<https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras>)
>
> Also have I copied the content of the examples and integration modules to the new repo, duplicated the build there and updated the versions to artifacts in the main repo to reference a variable.
>
> The build in the extras seems to work, now I’ll have to strip out configurations, dependency management etc. for stuff that’s not needed in the extras and do the same in the main repo.
>
>
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 09:22
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: AW: Splitting up the repos
> Ok …
>
> So, no comment I will simply treat as lazy consensus, therefore I will move forward with tagging the main repo with the latest changes as last revision before the split and reference that in the commit to the new repo.
> Then I’ll simply copy over the files and delete them from the main repo.
>
> As with other projects however, I really dislike this form of workting together. Defaulting back to lazy consensus costs a lot of valuable time as I have to wait a reasonable amount of time. If I had gotten any “sure … I’m fine with you doing X” I could have long finished this.
>
> In the future it would be a lot better, if some people would actually reply.
>
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> Datum: Donnerstag, 11. April 2024 um 10:36
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: Splitting up the repos
> Hi all,
>
> so now that the new repo is created (https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgitbox.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fasf%2Fiotdb-extras.git&data=05%7C02%7C%7Caca8308b666943558e9808dc5d2d4199%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638487696171574238%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=E1yJGlM6QYgOj5YRVXaBBqsWq4U3KwYAOXExhRrzKic%3D&reserved=0, but please don’t push anything there just yet), we would need to decide on which parts should be moved there.
>
>
>   *   “distribution”: Here I think we need to split the distribution. Keeping the distributions containing only core in the main repo and adding a new distribution module in the extras repo, that contains the downstream components.
>   *   “example” (which I would propose to rename to examples as it contains multiple)
>   *   “iotdb-connector”
>
>
> As it seems that in the integration-tests there are no tests testing the connectors, I guess we can leave that as it is.
>
> Now the problem is: There are multiple options to split up the repo and keeping the entire history.
>
>   1.  Split out one directory in a separate branch and then merge all branches into an empty new one
>   2.  Use the filter plugin to strip out all commits that match a regexp
>   3.  Simply ignore the history, copy the files to the new repo and delete them from the old.
>
> 3 is the simples, but the person doing the move will be marked as author. In general this is not that problematic, as the integration modules and the examples are usually not that complex, but I would understand, if people wanted to keep the history.
>
> Option 1 is probably the most work, but the most robust option, as with option 2, I had to give up when doing the PLC4X split as there were bugs and issues in the tooling.
>
> So, if nobody objects and we’ve decided on what should be moved, I personally would opt for option 3.
>
> Chris

AW: 答复: Splitting up the repos

Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.

Hmmm … well guess I’ll re-do my changes again then and split up the examples.

Next time it would be less of a waste of time if people would have responded to my questions quicker. I mean … I gave everyone 5 full days and got nothing.

Will do a second round of the iotdb part … the already split repo will be easy, but I don’t want to copy stuff back cause then we loose the commit history whithuot any necessity.
So, I’ll replay my changes.

Chris

Von: Haonan Hou <ha...@apache.org>
Datum: Donnerstag, 18. April 2024 um 05:29
An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
Betreff: Re: 答复: Splitting up the repos
+1

Haonan

On 2024/04/17 08:46:16 Wang Critas wrote:
> The examples could be classified into two parts
> (1) Connector example: flink, hadoop, kafka, pulsar, rabiitmq, rocketmq
> (2) IoTDB native api example: jdbc, mqtt, pipe, rest, schema, session,
> trigger, udf
>
> For (1), we could move into extra repo.
> For (2) , they should be retained in the IoTDB repo.
>
> Jialin Qiao
>
>
> Hi
>
> if we were to vote on this (which we can) I would vote +1 on ‘ The examples could be classified into two parts '
>
> Voting will be open for 72hr.
> A minimum of 3 binding +1 votes and more binding +1 than binding -1
> are required to pass.
> You can achieve the above by following [4].
> [ ] +1 accept
> [ ] -1 reject (explanation required)
>
> Xuan
>
> 发件人: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> 日期: 星期三, 2024年4月17日 16:38
> 收件人: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> 主题: AW: Splitting up the repos
> We however still need this to be decided.
>
> Currently we have something such as one binding vote for keeping the examples together and one for splitting it up.
> I have no objections to splitting it up, but we need to do things the Apache way here …
>
> Otherwise this would imply that there are votes that count more than others and we need to make sure this impression is not made.
>
> Chris
>
>
> Von: Wang Critas <cr...@outlook.com>
> Datum: Mittwoch, 17. April 2024 um 10:20
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: 答复: Splitting up the repos
> In here
> https://github.com/apache/iotdb-extras/pull/6<https://github.com/apache/iotdb-extras/pull/6><https://github.com/apache/iotdb-extras/pull/6%3chttps:/github.com/apache/iotdb-extras/pull/6%3e>
>
> 发件人: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> 日期: 星期一, 2024年4月15日 21:01
> 收件人: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> 主题: AW: Splitting up the repos
> Well,
>
> as I said … I’ve already done the work of splitting things up (I had waited 5 days for any comments here)
>
> If we would now do it differently, I am sure someone would be able to re-do the split based on my work and then simply delete the double examples from the extras repo.
>
> So, I would be voting for moving all examples to the extras, you for splitting the examples, guess we need at least a third vote (with hopefully not a 3rd opinion ;-) )
>
> Chris
>
>
> Von: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
> Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 14:38
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos
> Hi,
>
> The examples could be classified into two parts
> (1) Connector example: flink, hadoop, kafka, pulsar, rabiitmq, rocketmq
> (2) IoTDB native api example: jdbc, mqtt, pipe, rest, schema, session,
> trigger, udf
>
> For (1), we could move into extra repo.
> For (2) , they should be retained in the IoTDB repo.
>
> Jialin Qiao
>
> Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 17:56写道：
> >
> > Hmpf,
> >
> > a little bit sooner reply would have been good … I’m already done with the changes, also with moving all examples and the parts of the distribution bundling the connectors.
> >
> > I do think also moving the examples is a good idea. Usually, examples pull in all sorts of dependencies, which show up on vulnerability reports. Also do we have some examples that refer to stuff we now moved out of the main repo, we’d be getting a cyclic dependency from that, so we would have to split up the examples in that case.
> >
> > So, if we were to vote on this (which we can) I would vote +1 on moving all examples out of the main repo.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > Von: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
> > Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 11:20
> > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos
> > Hi,
> >
> > 1. Which Parts: Only iotdb-connector need to be moved,  distribution
> > and examples will impact the release and users.
> > 2. How to split up:  I prefer【Simply ignore the history, copy the
> > files to the new repo and delete them from the old】.
> >
> > Jialin Qiao
> >
> > Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 16:27写道：
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > >
> > > So, I’ve set a tag on the main repository “before-moving-extras” (https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras<https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras<https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras%3chttps:/github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras<https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras<https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras%3chttps:/github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras%3chttps:/github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras%3chttps:/github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras%3chttps:/github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras>>>>)
> > >
> > > Also have I copied the content of the examples and integration modules to the new repo, duplicated the build there and updated the versions to artifacts in the main repo to reference a variable.
> > >
> > > The build in the extras seems to work, now I’ll have to strip out configurations, dependency management etc. for stuff that’s not needed in the extras and do the same in the main repo.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> > > Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 09:22
> > > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > > Betreff: AW: Splitting up the repos
> > > Ok …
> > >
> > > So, no comment I will simply treat as lazy consensus, therefore I will move forward with tagging the main repo with the latest changes as last revision before the split and reference that in the commit to the new repo.
> > > Then I’ll simply copy over the files and delete them from the main repo.
> > >
> > > As with other projects however, I really dislike this form of workting together. Defaulting back to lazy consensus costs a lot of valuable time as I have to wait a reasonable amount of time. If I had gotten any “sure … I’m fine with you doing X” I could have long finished this.
> > >
> > > In the future it would be a lot better, if some people would actually reply.
> > >
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> > > Datum: Donnerstag, 11. April 2024 um 10:36
> > > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > > Betreff: Splitting up the repos
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > so now that the new repo is created (https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/iotdb-extras.git, but please don’t push anything there just yet), we would need to decide on which parts should be moved there.
> > >
> > >
> > >   *   “distribution”: Here I think we need to split the distribution. Keeping the distributions containing only core in the main repo and adding a new distribution module in the extras repo, that contains the downstream components.
> > >   *   “example” (which I would propose to rename to examples as it contains multiple)
> > >   *   “iotdb-connector”
> > >
> > >
> > > As it seems that in the integration-tests there are no tests testing the connectors, I guess we can leave that as it is.
> > >
> > > Now the problem is: There are multiple options to split up the repo and keeping the entire history.
> > >
> > >   1.  Split out one directory in a separate branch and then merge all branches into an empty new one
> > >   2.  Use the filter plugin to strip out all commits that match a regexp
> > >   3.  Simply ignore the history, copy the files to the new repo and delete them from the old.
> > >
> > > 3 is the simples, but the person doing the move will be marked as author. In general this is not that problematic, as the integration modules and the examples are usually not that complex, but I would understand, if people wanted to keep the history.
> > >
> > > Option 1 is probably the most work, but the most robust option, as with option 2, I had to give up when doing the PLC4X split as there were bugs and issues in the tooling.
> > >
> > > So, if nobody objects and we’ve decided on what should be moved, I personally would opt for option 3.
> > >
> > > Chris
>

Re: 答复: Splitting up the repos

Posted by Haonan Hou <ha...@apache.org>.

+1

Haonan

On 2024/04/17 08:46:16 Wang Critas wrote:
> The examples could be classified into two parts
> (1) Connector example: flink, hadoop, kafka, pulsar, rabiitmq, rocketmq
> (2) IoTDB native api example: jdbc, mqtt, pipe, rest, schema, session,
> trigger, udf
> 
> For (1), we could move into extra repo.
> For (2) , they should be retained in the IoTDB repo.
> 
> Jialin Qiao
> 
> 
> Hi
> 
> if we were to vote on this (which we can) I would vote +1 on ‘ The examples could be classified into two parts '
> 
> Voting will be open for 72hr.
> A minimum of 3 binding +1 votes and more binding +1 than binding -1
> are required to pass.
> You can achieve the above by following [4].
> [ ] +1 accept
> [ ] -1 reject (explanation required)
> 
> Xuan
> 
> 发件人: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> 日期: 星期三, 2024年4月17日 16:38
> 收件人: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> 主题: AW: Splitting up the repos
> We however still need this to be decided.
> 
> Currently we have something such as one binding vote for keeping the examples together and one for splitting it up.
> I have no objections to splitting it up, but we need to do things the Apache way here …
> 
> Otherwise this would imply that there are votes that count more than others and we need to make sure this impression is not made.
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> Von: Wang Critas <cr...@outlook.com>
> Datum: Mittwoch, 17. April 2024 um 10:20
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: 答复: Splitting up the repos
> In here
> https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fiotdb-extras%2Fpull%2F6&data=05%7C02%7C%7C0ef2e475da4d43765f3c08dc5eb9c496%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638489399201851637%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=5Thiae%2BMRGzDZ6vklThuZO4GuXomaIntuyh%2BIuC3eq0%3D&reserved=0<https://github.com/apache/iotdb-extras/pull/6>
> 
> 发件人: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> 日期: 星期一, 2024年4月15日 21:01
> 收件人: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> 主题: AW: Splitting up the repos
> Well,
> 
> as I said … I’ve already done the work of splitting things up (I had waited 5 days for any comments here)
> 
> If we would now do it differently, I am sure someone would be able to re-do the split based on my work and then simply delete the double examples from the extras repo.
> 
> So, I would be voting for moving all examples to the extras, you for splitting the examples, guess we need at least a third vote (with hopefully not a 3rd opinion ;-) )
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> Von: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
> Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 14:38
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos
> Hi,
> 
> The examples could be classified into two parts
> (1) Connector example: flink, hadoop, kafka, pulsar, rabiitmq, rocketmq
> (2) IoTDB native api example: jdbc, mqtt, pipe, rest, schema, session,
> trigger, udf
> 
> For (1), we could move into extra repo.
> For (2) , they should be retained in the IoTDB repo.
> 
> Jialin Qiao
> 
> Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 17:56写道：
> >
> > Hmpf,
> >
> > a little bit sooner reply would have been good … I’m already done with the changes, also with moving all examples and the parts of the distribution bundling the connectors.
> >
> > I do think also moving the examples is a good idea. Usually, examples pull in all sorts of dependencies, which show up on vulnerability reports. Also do we have some examples that refer to stuff we now moved out of the main repo, we’d be getting a cyclic dependency from that, so we would have to split up the examples in that case.
> >
> > So, if we were to vote on this (which we can) I would vote +1 on moving all examples out of the main repo.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > Von: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
> > Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 11:20
> > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos
> > Hi,
> >
> > 1. Which Parts: Only iotdb-connector need to be moved,  distribution
> > and examples will impact the release and users.
> > 2. How to split up:  I prefer【Simply ignore the history, copy the
> > files to the new repo and delete them from the old】.
> >
> > Jialin Qiao
> >
> > Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 16:27写道：
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > >
> > > So, I’ve set a tag on the main repository “before-moving-extras” (https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fiotdb%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Fbefore-moving-extras&data=05%7C02%7C%7C0ef2e475da4d43765f3c08dc5eb9c496%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638489399201859843%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=9avY%2FHekomDIBORka2KgTSSMTkhvBR%2F3%2FfEEFV5rlTU%3D&reserved=0<https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fiotdb%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Fbefore-moving-extras&data=05%7C02%7C%7C0ef2e475da4d43765f3c08dc5eb9c496%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638489399201867056%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=qe3INNay6vUSfFhB6%2F7wNwRtEg7zhpbUK7oOZV6sRRo%3D&reserved=0<https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fiotdb%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Fbefore-moving-extras%253chttps%3A%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fiotdb%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Fbefore-moving-extras&data=05%7C02%7C%7C0ef2e475da4d43765f3c08dc5eb9c496%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638489399201872258%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=VCJzkAlzKpEcuAq%2FC6HelkgslVnsOhnParoesUqYgFQ%3D&reserved=0<https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras>>>)
> > >
> > > Also have I copied the content of the examples and integration modules to the new repo, duplicated the build there and updated the versions to artifacts in the main repo to reference a variable.
> > >
> > > The build in the extras seems to work, now I’ll have to strip out configurations, dependency management etc. for stuff that’s not needed in the extras and do the same in the main repo.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> > > Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 09:22
> > > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > > Betreff: AW: Splitting up the repos
> > > Ok …
> > >
> > > So, no comment I will simply treat as lazy consensus, therefore I will move forward with tagging the main repo with the latest changes as last revision before the split and reference that in the commit to the new repo.
> > > Then I’ll simply copy over the files and delete them from the main repo.
> > >
> > > As with other projects however, I really dislike this form of workting together. Defaulting back to lazy consensus costs a lot of valuable time as I have to wait a reasonable amount of time. If I had gotten any “sure … I’m fine with you doing X” I could have long finished this.
> > >
> > > In the future it would be a lot better, if some people would actually reply.
> > >
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> > > Datum: Donnerstag, 11. April 2024 um 10:36
> > > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > > Betreff: Splitting up the repos
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > so now that the new repo is created (https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgitbox.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fasf%2Fiotdb-extras.git&data=05%7C02%7C%7C0ef2e475da4d43765f3c08dc5eb9c496%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638489399201876965%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Hkp49RUNCfs18Dt6HTsLrmJ2Vla%2Bn2u9gWQJFQrgUb4%3D&reserved=0, but please don’t push anything there just yet), we would need to decide on which parts should be moved there.
> > >
> > >
> > >   *   “distribution”: Here I think we need to split the distribution. Keeping the distributions containing only core in the main repo and adding a new distribution module in the extras repo, that contains the downstream components.
> > >   *   “example” (which I would propose to rename to examples as it contains multiple)
> > >   *   “iotdb-connector”
> > >
> > >
> > > As it seems that in the integration-tests there are no tests testing the connectors, I guess we can leave that as it is.
> > >
> > > Now the problem is: There are multiple options to split up the repo and keeping the entire history.
> > >
> > >   1.  Split out one directory in a separate branch and then merge all branches into an empty new one
> > >   2.  Use the filter plugin to strip out all commits that match a regexp
> > >   3.  Simply ignore the history, copy the files to the new repo and delete them from the old.
> > >
> > > 3 is the simples, but the person doing the move will be marked as author. In general this is not that problematic, as the integration modules and the examples are usually not that complex, but I would understand, if people wanted to keep the history.
> > >
> > > Option 1 is probably the most work, but the most robust option, as with option 2, I had to give up when doing the PLC4X split as there were bugs and issues in the tooling.
> > >
> > > So, if nobody objects and we’ve decided on what should be moved, I personally would opt for option 3.
> > >
> > > Chris
>

答复: Splitting up the repos

Posted by Wang Critas <cr...@outlook.com>.

The examples could be classified into two parts
(1) Connector example: flink, hadoop, kafka, pulsar, rabiitmq, rocketmq
(2) IoTDB native api example: jdbc, mqtt, pipe, rest, schema, session,
trigger, udf

For (1), we could move into extra repo.
For (2) , they should be retained in the IoTDB repo.

Jialin Qiao


Hi

if we were to vote on this (which we can) I would vote +1 on ‘ The examples could be classified into two parts '

Voting will be open for 72hr.
A minimum of 3 binding +1 votes and more binding +1 than binding -1
are required to pass.
You can achieve the above by following [4].
[ ] +1 accept
[ ] -1 reject (explanation required)

Xuan

发件人: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
日期: 星期三, 2024年4月17日 16:38
收件人: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
主题: AW: Splitting up the repos
We however still need this to be decided.

Currently we have something such as one binding vote for keeping the examples together and one for splitting it up.
I have no objections to splitting it up, but we need to do things the Apache way here …

Otherwise this would imply that there are votes that count more than others and we need to make sure this impression is not made.

Chris


Von: Wang Critas <cr...@outlook.com>
Datum: Mittwoch, 17. April 2024 um 10:20
An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
Betreff: 答复: Splitting up the repos
In here
https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fiotdb-extras%2Fpull%2F6&data=05%7C02%7C%7C0ef2e475da4d43765f3c08dc5eb9c496%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638489399201851637%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=5Thiae%2BMRGzDZ6vklThuZO4GuXomaIntuyh%2BIuC3eq0%3D&reserved=0<https://github.com/apache/iotdb-extras/pull/6>

发件人: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
日期: 星期一, 2024年4月15日 21:01
收件人: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
主题: AW: Splitting up the repos
Well,

as I said … I’ve already done the work of splitting things up (I had waited 5 days for any comments here)

If we would now do it differently, I am sure someone would be able to re-do the split based on my work and then simply delete the double examples from the extras repo.

So, I would be voting for moving all examples to the extras, you for splitting the examples, guess we need at least a third vote (with hopefully not a 3rd opinion ;-) )

Chris


Von: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 14:38
An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos
Hi,

The examples could be classified into two parts
(1) Connector example: flink, hadoop, kafka, pulsar, rabiitmq, rocketmq
(2) IoTDB native api example: jdbc, mqtt, pipe, rest, schema, session,
trigger, udf

For (1), we could move into extra repo.
For (2) , they should be retained in the IoTDB repo.

Jialin Qiao

Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 17:56写道：
>
> Hmpf,
>
> a little bit sooner reply would have been good … I’m already done with the changes, also with moving all examples and the parts of the distribution bundling the connectors.
>
> I do think also moving the examples is a good idea. Usually, examples pull in all sorts of dependencies, which show up on vulnerability reports. Also do we have some examples that refer to stuff we now moved out of the main repo, we’d be getting a cyclic dependency from that, so we would have to split up the examples in that case.
>
> So, if we were to vote on this (which we can) I would vote +1 on moving all examples out of the main repo.
>
> Chris
>
>
> Von: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
> Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 11:20
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos
> Hi,
>
> 1. Which Parts: Only iotdb-connector need to be moved,  distribution
> and examples will impact the release and users.
> 2. How to split up:  I prefer【Simply ignore the history, copy the
> files to the new repo and delete them from the old】.
>
> Jialin Qiao
>
> Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 16:27写道：
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> >
> > So, I’ve set a tag on the main repository “before-moving-extras” (https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fiotdb%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Fbefore-moving-extras&data=05%7C02%7C%7C0ef2e475da4d43765f3c08dc5eb9c496%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638489399201859843%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=9avY%2FHekomDIBORka2KgTSSMTkhvBR%2F3%2FfEEFV5rlTU%3D&reserved=0<https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fiotdb%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Fbefore-moving-extras&data=05%7C02%7C%7C0ef2e475da4d43765f3c08dc5eb9c496%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638489399201867056%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=qe3INNay6vUSfFhB6%2F7wNwRtEg7zhpbUK7oOZV6sRRo%3D&reserved=0<https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fiotdb%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Fbefore-moving-extras%253chttps%3A%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fiotdb%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Fbefore-moving-extras&data=05%7C02%7C%7C0ef2e475da4d43765f3c08dc5eb9c496%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638489399201872258%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=VCJzkAlzKpEcuAq%2FC6HelkgslVnsOhnParoesUqYgFQ%3D&reserved=0<https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras>>>)
> >
> > Also have I copied the content of the examples and integration modules to the new repo, duplicated the build there and updated the versions to artifacts in the main repo to reference a variable.
> >
> > The build in the extras seems to work, now I’ll have to strip out configurations, dependency management etc. for stuff that’s not needed in the extras and do the same in the main repo.
> >
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> > Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 09:22
> > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > Betreff: AW: Splitting up the repos
> > Ok …
> >
> > So, no comment I will simply treat as lazy consensus, therefore I will move forward with tagging the main repo with the latest changes as last revision before the split and reference that in the commit to the new repo.
> > Then I’ll simply copy over the files and delete them from the main repo.
> >
> > As with other projects however, I really dislike this form of workting together. Defaulting back to lazy consensus costs a lot of valuable time as I have to wait a reasonable amount of time. If I had gotten any “sure … I’m fine with you doing X” I could have long finished this.
> >
> > In the future it would be a lot better, if some people would actually reply.
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> > Datum: Donnerstag, 11. April 2024 um 10:36
> > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > Betreff: Splitting up the repos
> > Hi all,
> >
> > so now that the new repo is created (https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgitbox.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fasf%2Fiotdb-extras.git&data=05%7C02%7C%7C0ef2e475da4d43765f3c08dc5eb9c496%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638489399201876965%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Hkp49RUNCfs18Dt6HTsLrmJ2Vla%2Bn2u9gWQJFQrgUb4%3D&reserved=0, but please don’t push anything there just yet), we would need to decide on which parts should be moved there.
> >
> >
> >   *   “distribution”: Here I think we need to split the distribution. Keeping the distributions containing only core in the main repo and adding a new distribution module in the extras repo, that contains the downstream components.
> >   *   “example” (which I would propose to rename to examples as it contains multiple)
> >   *   “iotdb-connector”
> >
> >
> > As it seems that in the integration-tests there are no tests testing the connectors, I guess we can leave that as it is.
> >
> > Now the problem is: There are multiple options to split up the repo and keeping the entire history.
> >
> >   1.  Split out one directory in a separate branch and then merge all branches into an empty new one
> >   2.  Use the filter plugin to strip out all commits that match a regexp
> >   3.  Simply ignore the history, copy the files to the new repo and delete them from the old.
> >
> > 3 is the simples, but the person doing the move will be marked as author. In general this is not that problematic, as the integration modules and the examples are usually not that complex, but I would understand, if people wanted to keep the history.
> >
> > Option 1 is probably the most work, but the most robust option, as with option 2, I had to give up when doing the PLC4X split as there were bugs and issues in the tooling.
> >
> > So, if nobody objects and we’ve decided on what should be moved, I personally would opt for option 3.
> >
> > Chris

AW: Splitting up the repos

Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.

We however still need this to be decided.

Currently we have something such as one binding vote for keeping the examples together and one for splitting it up.
I have no objections to splitting it up, but we need to do things the Apache way here …

Otherwise this would imply that there are votes that count more than others and we need to make sure this impression is not made.

Chris


Von: Wang Critas <cr...@outlook.com>
Datum: Mittwoch, 17. April 2024 um 10:20
An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
Betreff: 答复: Splitting up the repos
In here
https://github.com/apache/iotdb-extras/pull/6

发件人: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
日期: 星期一, 2024年4月15日 21:01
收件人: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
主题: AW: Splitting up the repos
Well,

as I said … I’ve already done the work of splitting things up (I had waited 5 days for any comments here)

If we would now do it differently, I am sure someone would be able to re-do the split based on my work and then simply delete the double examples from the extras repo.

So, I would be voting for moving all examples to the extras, you for splitting the examples, guess we need at least a third vote (with hopefully not a 3rd opinion ;-) )

Chris


Von: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 14:38
An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos
Hi,

The examples could be classified into two parts
(1) Connector example: flink, hadoop, kafka, pulsar, rabiitmq, rocketmq
(2) IoTDB native api example: jdbc, mqtt, pipe, rest, schema, session,
trigger, udf

For (1), we could move into extra repo.
For (2) , they should be retained in the IoTDB repo.

Jialin Qiao

Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 17:56写道：
>
> Hmpf,
>
> a little bit sooner reply would have been good … I’m already done with the changes, also with moving all examples and the parts of the distribution bundling the connectors.
>
> I do think also moving the examples is a good idea. Usually, examples pull in all sorts of dependencies, which show up on vulnerability reports. Also do we have some examples that refer to stuff we now moved out of the main repo, we’d be getting a cyclic dependency from that, so we would have to split up the examples in that case.
>
> So, if we were to vote on this (which we can) I would vote +1 on moving all examples out of the main repo.
>
> Chris
>
>
> Von: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
> Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 11:20
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos
> Hi,
>
> 1. Which Parts: Only iotdb-connector need to be moved,  distribution
> and examples will impact the release and users.
> 2. How to split up:  I prefer【Simply ignore the history, copy the
> files to the new repo and delete them from the old】.
>
> Jialin Qiao
>
> Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 16:27写道：
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> >
> > So, I’ve set a tag on the main repository “before-moving-extras” (https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras<https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras<https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras%3chttps:/github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras>>)
> >
> > Also have I copied the content of the examples and integration modules to the new repo, duplicated the build there and updated the versions to artifacts in the main repo to reference a variable.
> >
> > The build in the extras seems to work, now I’ll have to strip out configurations, dependency management etc. for stuff that’s not needed in the extras and do the same in the main repo.
> >
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> > Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 09:22
> > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > Betreff: AW: Splitting up the repos
> > Ok …
> >
> > So, no comment I will simply treat as lazy consensus, therefore I will move forward with tagging the main repo with the latest changes as last revision before the split and reference that in the commit to the new repo.
> > Then I’ll simply copy over the files and delete them from the main repo.
> >
> > As with other projects however, I really dislike this form of workting together. Defaulting back to lazy consensus costs a lot of valuable time as I have to wait a reasonable amount of time. If I had gotten any “sure … I’m fine with you doing X” I could have long finished this.
> >
> > In the future it would be a lot better, if some people would actually reply.
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> > Datum: Donnerstag, 11. April 2024 um 10:36
> > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > Betreff: Splitting up the repos
> > Hi all,
> >
> > so now that the new repo is created (https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/iotdb-extras.git, but please don’t push anything there just yet), we would need to decide on which parts should be moved there.
> >
> >
> >   *   “distribution”: Here I think we need to split the distribution. Keeping the distributions containing only core in the main repo and adding a new distribution module in the extras repo, that contains the downstream components.
> >   *   “example” (which I would propose to rename to examples as it contains multiple)
> >   *   “iotdb-connector”
> >
> >
> > As it seems that in the integration-tests there are no tests testing the connectors, I guess we can leave that as it is.
> >
> > Now the problem is: There are multiple options to split up the repo and keeping the entire history.
> >
> >   1.  Split out one directory in a separate branch and then merge all branches into an empty new one
> >   2.  Use the filter plugin to strip out all commits that match a regexp
> >   3.  Simply ignore the history, copy the files to the new repo and delete them from the old.
> >
> > 3 is the simples, but the person doing the move will be marked as author. In general this is not that problematic, as the integration modules and the examples are usually not that complex, but I would understand, if people wanted to keep the history.
> >
> > Option 1 is probably the most work, but the most robust option, as with option 2, I had to give up when doing the PLC4X split as there were bugs and issues in the tooling.
> >
> > So, if nobody objects and we’ve decided on what should be moved, I personally would opt for option 3.
> >
> > Chris

答复: Splitting up the repos

Posted by Wang Critas <cr...@outlook.com>.

In here
https://github.com/apache/iotdb-extras/pull/6

发件人: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
日期: 星期一, 2024年4月15日 21:01
收件人: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
主题: AW: Splitting up the repos
Well,

as I said … I’ve already done the work of splitting things up (I had waited 5 days for any comments here)

If we would now do it differently, I am sure someone would be able to re-do the split based on my work and then simply delete the double examples from the extras repo.

So, I would be voting for moving all examples to the extras, you for splitting the examples, guess we need at least a third vote (with hopefully not a 3rd opinion ;-) )

Chris


Von: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 14:38
An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos
Hi,

The examples could be classified into two parts
(1) Connector example: flink, hadoop, kafka, pulsar, rabiitmq, rocketmq
(2) IoTDB native api example: jdbc, mqtt, pipe, rest, schema, session,
trigger, udf

For (1), we could move into extra repo.
For (2) , they should be retained in the IoTDB repo.

Jialin Qiao

Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 17:56写道：
>
> Hmpf,
>
> a little bit sooner reply would have been good … I’m already done with the changes, also with moving all examples and the parts of the distribution bundling the connectors.
>
> I do think also moving the examples is a good idea. Usually, examples pull in all sorts of dependencies, which show up on vulnerability reports. Also do we have some examples that refer to stuff we now moved out of the main repo, we’d be getting a cyclic dependency from that, so we would have to split up the examples in that case.
>
> So, if we were to vote on this (which we can) I would vote +1 on moving all examples out of the main repo.
>
> Chris
>
>
> Von: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
> Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 11:20
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos
> Hi,
>
> 1. Which Parts: Only iotdb-connector need to be moved,  distribution
> and examples will impact the release and users.
> 2. How to split up:  I prefer【Simply ignore the history, copy the
> files to the new repo and delete them from the old】.
>
> Jialin Qiao
>
> Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 16:27写道：
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> >
> > So, I’ve set a tag on the main repository “before-moving-extras” (https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fiotdb%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Fbefore-moving-extras&data=05%7C02%7C%7Ca2db3d8c049d429990f808dc5d4c29b1%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638487828914066189%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Y2gAdl928x3zdjrZbpEUdYQgHc2EvUIO%2Bdht%2FaucMMY%3D&reserved=0<https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras>)
> >
> > Also have I copied the content of the examples and integration modules to the new repo, duplicated the build there and updated the versions to artifacts in the main repo to reference a variable.
> >
> > The build in the extras seems to work, now I’ll have to strip out configurations, dependency management etc. for stuff that’s not needed in the extras and do the same in the main repo.
> >
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> > Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 09:22
> > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > Betreff: AW: Splitting up the repos
> > Ok …
> >
> > So, no comment I will simply treat as lazy consensus, therefore I will move forward with tagging the main repo with the latest changes as last revision before the split and reference that in the commit to the new repo.
> > Then I’ll simply copy over the files and delete them from the main repo.
> >
> > As with other projects however, I really dislike this form of workting together. Defaulting back to lazy consensus costs a lot of valuable time as I have to wait a reasonable amount of time. If I had gotten any “sure … I’m fine with you doing X” I could have long finished this.
> >
> > In the future it would be a lot better, if some people would actually reply.
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> > Datum: Donnerstag, 11. April 2024 um 10:36
> > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > Betreff: Splitting up the repos
> > Hi all,
> >
> > so now that the new repo is created (https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgitbox.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fasf%2Fiotdb-extras.git&data=05%7C02%7C%7Ca2db3d8c049d429990f808dc5d4c29b1%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638487828914074476%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=SO2Jd9MAaza3jytG%2FAFLoQjWeCrX2%2F4MIHmId88cA9w%3D&reserved=0, but please don’t push anything there just yet), we would need to decide on which parts should be moved there.
> >
> >
> >   *   “distribution”: Here I think we need to split the distribution. Keeping the distributions containing only core in the main repo and adding a new distribution module in the extras repo, that contains the downstream components.
> >   *   “example” (which I would propose to rename to examples as it contains multiple)
> >   *   “iotdb-connector”
> >
> >
> > As it seems that in the integration-tests there are no tests testing the connectors, I guess we can leave that as it is.
> >
> > Now the problem is: There are multiple options to split up the repo and keeping the entire history.
> >
> >   1.  Split out one directory in a separate branch and then merge all branches into an empty new one
> >   2.  Use the filter plugin to strip out all commits that match a regexp
> >   3.  Simply ignore the history, copy the files to the new repo and delete them from the old.
> >
> > 3 is the simples, but the person doing the move will be marked as author. In general this is not that problematic, as the integration modules and the examples are usually not that complex, but I would understand, if people wanted to keep the history.
> >
> > Option 1 is probably the most work, but the most robust option, as with option 2, I had to give up when doing the PLC4X split as there were bugs and issues in the tooling.
> >
> > So, if nobody objects and we’ve decided on what should be moved, I personally would opt for option 3.
> >
> > Chris

AW: Splitting up the repos

Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.

Well,

as I said … I’ve already done the work of splitting things up (I had waited 5 days for any comments here)

If we would now do it differently, I am sure someone would be able to re-do the split based on my work and then simply delete the double examples from the extras repo.

So, I would be voting for moving all examples to the extras, you for splitting the examples, guess we need at least a third vote (with hopefully not a 3rd opinion ;-) )

Chris


Von: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 14:38
An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos
Hi,

The examples could be classified into two parts
(1) Connector example: flink, hadoop, kafka, pulsar, rabiitmq, rocketmq
(2) IoTDB native api example: jdbc, mqtt, pipe, rest, schema, session,
trigger, udf

For (1), we could move into extra repo.
For (2) , they should be retained in the IoTDB repo.

Jialin Qiao

Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 17:56写道：
>
> Hmpf,
>
> a little bit sooner reply would have been good … I’m already done with the changes, also with moving all examples and the parts of the distribution bundling the connectors.
>
> I do think also moving the examples is a good idea. Usually, examples pull in all sorts of dependencies, which show up on vulnerability reports. Also do we have some examples that refer to stuff we now moved out of the main repo, we’d be getting a cyclic dependency from that, so we would have to split up the examples in that case.
>
> So, if we were to vote on this (which we can) I would vote +1 on moving all examples out of the main repo.
>
> Chris
>
>
> Von: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
> Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 11:20
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos
> Hi,
>
> 1. Which Parts: Only iotdb-connector need to be moved,  distribution
> and examples will impact the release and users.
> 2. How to split up:  I prefer【Simply ignore the history, copy the
> files to the new repo and delete them from the old】.
>
> Jialin Qiao
>
> Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 16:27写道：
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> >
> > So, I’ve set a tag on the main repository “before-moving-extras” (https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras)
> >
> > Also have I copied the content of the examples and integration modules to the new repo, duplicated the build there and updated the versions to artifacts in the main repo to reference a variable.
> >
> > The build in the extras seems to work, now I’ll have to strip out configurations, dependency management etc. for stuff that’s not needed in the extras and do the same in the main repo.
> >
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> > Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 09:22
> > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > Betreff: AW: Splitting up the repos
> > Ok …
> >
> > So, no comment I will simply treat as lazy consensus, therefore I will move forward with tagging the main repo with the latest changes as last revision before the split and reference that in the commit to the new repo.
> > Then I’ll simply copy over the files and delete them from the main repo.
> >
> > As with other projects however, I really dislike this form of workting together. Defaulting back to lazy consensus costs a lot of valuable time as I have to wait a reasonable amount of time. If I had gotten any “sure … I’m fine with you doing X” I could have long finished this.
> >
> > In the future it would be a lot better, if some people would actually reply.
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> > Datum: Donnerstag, 11. April 2024 um 10:36
> > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > Betreff: Splitting up the repos
> > Hi all,
> >
> > so now that the new repo is created (https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/iotdb-extras.git, but please don’t push anything there just yet), we would need to decide on which parts should be moved there.
> >
> >
> >   *   “distribution”: Here I think we need to split the distribution. Keeping the distributions containing only core in the main repo and adding a new distribution module in the extras repo, that contains the downstream components.
> >   *   “example” (which I would propose to rename to examples as it contains multiple)
> >   *   “iotdb-connector”
> >
> >
> > As it seems that in the integration-tests there are no tests testing the connectors, I guess we can leave that as it is.
> >
> > Now the problem is: There are multiple options to split up the repo and keeping the entire history.
> >
> >   1.  Split out one directory in a separate branch and then merge all branches into an empty new one
> >   2.  Use the filter plugin to strip out all commits that match a regexp
> >   3.  Simply ignore the history, copy the files to the new repo and delete them from the old.
> >
> > 3 is the simples, but the person doing the move will be marked as author. In general this is not that problematic, as the integration modules and the examples are usually not that complex, but I would understand, if people wanted to keep the history.
> >
> > Option 1 is probably the most work, but the most robust option, as with option 2, I had to give up when doing the PLC4X split as there were bugs and issues in the tooling.
> >
> > So, if nobody objects and we’ve decided on what should be moved, I personally would opt for option 3.
> >
> > Chris

Re: Splitting up the repos

Posted by Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>.

Hi,

The examples could be classified into two parts
(1) Connector example: flink, hadoop, kafka, pulsar, rabiitmq, rocketmq
(2) IoTDB native api example: jdbc, mqtt, pipe, rest, schema, session,
trigger, udf

For (1), we could move into extra repo.
For (2) , they should be retained in the IoTDB repo.

Jialin Qiao

Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 17:56写道：
>
> Hmpf,
>
> a little bit sooner reply would have been good … I’m already done with the changes, also with moving all examples and the parts of the distribution bundling the connectors.
>
> I do think also moving the examples is a good idea. Usually, examples pull in all sorts of dependencies, which show up on vulnerability reports. Also do we have some examples that refer to stuff we now moved out of the main repo, we’d be getting a cyclic dependency from that, so we would have to split up the examples in that case.
>
> So, if we were to vote on this (which we can) I would vote +1 on moving all examples out of the main repo.
>
> Chris
>
>
> Von: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
> Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 11:20
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos
> Hi,
>
> 1. Which Parts: Only iotdb-connector need to be moved,  distribution
> and examples will impact the release and users.
> 2. How to split up:  I prefer【Simply ignore the history, copy the
> files to the new repo and delete them from the old】.
>
> Jialin Qiao
>
> Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 16:27写道：
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> >
> > So, I’ve set a tag on the main repository “before-moving-extras” (https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras)
> >
> > Also have I copied the content of the examples and integration modules to the new repo, duplicated the build there and updated the versions to artifacts in the main repo to reference a variable.
> >
> > The build in the extras seems to work, now I’ll have to strip out configurations, dependency management etc. for stuff that’s not needed in the extras and do the same in the main repo.
> >
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> > Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 09:22
> > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > Betreff: AW: Splitting up the repos
> > Ok …
> >
> > So, no comment I will simply treat as lazy consensus, therefore I will move forward with tagging the main repo with the latest changes as last revision before the split and reference that in the commit to the new repo.
> > Then I’ll simply copy over the files and delete them from the main repo.
> >
> > As with other projects however, I really dislike this form of workting together. Defaulting back to lazy consensus costs a lot of valuable time as I have to wait a reasonable amount of time. If I had gotten any “sure … I’m fine with you doing X” I could have long finished this.
> >
> > In the future it would be a lot better, if some people would actually reply.
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> > Datum: Donnerstag, 11. April 2024 um 10:36
> > An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> > Betreff: Splitting up the repos
> > Hi all,
> >
> > so now that the new repo is created (https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/iotdb-extras.git, but please don’t push anything there just yet), we would need to decide on which parts should be moved there.
> >
> >
> >   *   “distribution”: Here I think we need to split the distribution. Keeping the distributions containing only core in the main repo and adding a new distribution module in the extras repo, that contains the downstream components.
> >   *   “example” (which I would propose to rename to examples as it contains multiple)
> >   *   “iotdb-connector”
> >
> >
> > As it seems that in the integration-tests there are no tests testing the connectors, I guess we can leave that as it is.
> >
> > Now the problem is: There are multiple options to split up the repo and keeping the entire history.
> >
> >   1.  Split out one directory in a separate branch and then merge all branches into an empty new one
> >   2.  Use the filter plugin to strip out all commits that match a regexp
> >   3.  Simply ignore the history, copy the files to the new repo and delete them from the old.
> >
> > 3 is the simples, but the person doing the move will be marked as author. In general this is not that problematic, as the integration modules and the examples are usually not that complex, but I would understand, if people wanted to keep the history.
> >
> > Option 1 is probably the most work, but the most robust option, as with option 2, I had to give up when doing the PLC4X split as there were bugs and issues in the tooling.
> >
> > So, if nobody objects and we’ve decided on what should be moved, I personally would opt for option 3.
> >
> > Chris

AW: Splitting up the repos

Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.

Hmpf,

a little bit sooner reply would have been good … I’m already done with the changes, also with moving all examples and the parts of the distribution bundling the connectors.

I do think also moving the examples is a good idea. Usually, examples pull in all sorts of dependencies, which show up on vulnerability reports. Also do we have some examples that refer to stuff we now moved out of the main repo, we’d be getting a cyclic dependency from that, so we would have to split up the examples in that case.

So, if we were to vote on this (which we can) I would vote +1 on moving all examples out of the main repo.

Chris


Von: Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>
Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 11:20
An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
Betreff: Re: Splitting up the repos
Hi,

1. Which Parts: Only iotdb-connector need to be moved,  distribution
and examples will impact the release and users.
2. How to split up:  I prefer【Simply ignore the history, copy the
files to the new repo and delete them from the old】.

Jialin Qiao

Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 16:27写道：
>
> Hi all,
>
>
> So, I’ve set a tag on the main repository “before-moving-extras” (https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras)
>
> Also have I copied the content of the examples and integration modules to the new repo, duplicated the build there and updated the versions to artifacts in the main repo to reference a variable.
>
> The build in the extras seems to work, now I’ll have to strip out configurations, dependency management etc. for stuff that’s not needed in the extras and do the same in the main repo.
>
>
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 09:22
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: AW: Splitting up the repos
> Ok …
>
> So, no comment I will simply treat as lazy consensus, therefore I will move forward with tagging the main repo with the latest changes as last revision before the split and reference that in the commit to the new repo.
> Then I’ll simply copy over the files and delete them from the main repo.
>
> As with other projects however, I really dislike this form of workting together. Defaulting back to lazy consensus costs a lot of valuable time as I have to wait a reasonable amount of time. If I had gotten any “sure … I’m fine with you doing X” I could have long finished this.
>
> In the future it would be a lot better, if some people would actually reply.
>
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> Datum: Donnerstag, 11. April 2024 um 10:36
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: Splitting up the repos
> Hi all,
>
> so now that the new repo is created (https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/iotdb-extras.git, but please don’t push anything there just yet), we would need to decide on which parts should be moved there.
>
>
>   *   “distribution”: Here I think we need to split the distribution. Keeping the distributions containing only core in the main repo and adding a new distribution module in the extras repo, that contains the downstream components.
>   *   “example” (which I would propose to rename to examples as it contains multiple)
>   *   “iotdb-connector”
>
>
> As it seems that in the integration-tests there are no tests testing the connectors, I guess we can leave that as it is.
>
> Now the problem is: There are multiple options to split up the repo and keeping the entire history.
>
>   1.  Split out one directory in a separate branch and then merge all branches into an empty new one
>   2.  Use the filter plugin to strip out all commits that match a regexp
>   3.  Simply ignore the history, copy the files to the new repo and delete them from the old.
>
> 3 is the simples, but the person doing the move will be marked as author. In general this is not that problematic, as the integration modules and the examples are usually not that complex, but I would understand, if people wanted to keep the history.
>
> Option 1 is probably the most work, but the most robust option, as with option 2, I had to give up when doing the PLC4X split as there were bugs and issues in the tooling.
>
> So, if nobody objects and we’ve decided on what should be moved, I personally would opt for option 3.
>
> Chris

Re: Splitting up the repos

Posted by Jialin Qiao <qi...@apache.org>.

Hi,

1. Which Parts: Only iotdb-connector need to be moved,  distribution
and examples will impact the release and users.
2. How to split up:  I prefer【Simply ignore the history, copy the
files to the new repo and delete them from the old】.

Jialin Qiao

Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> 于2024年4月15日周一 16:27写道：
>
> Hi all,
>
>
> So, I’ve set a tag on the main repository “before-moving-extras” (https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras)
>
> Also have I copied the content of the examples and integration modules to the new repo, duplicated the build there and updated the versions to artifacts in the main repo to reference a variable.
>
> The build in the extras seems to work, now I’ll have to strip out configurations, dependency management etc. for stuff that’s not needed in the extras and do the same in the main repo.
>
>
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 09:22
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: AW: Splitting up the repos
> Ok …
>
> So, no comment I will simply treat as lazy consensus, therefore I will move forward with tagging the main repo with the latest changes as last revision before the split and reference that in the commit to the new repo.
> Then I’ll simply copy over the files and delete them from the main repo.
>
> As with other projects however, I really dislike this form of workting together. Defaulting back to lazy consensus costs a lot of valuable time as I have to wait a reasonable amount of time. If I had gotten any “sure … I’m fine with you doing X” I could have long finished this.
>
> In the future it would be a lot better, if some people would actually reply.
>
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
> Datum: Donnerstag, 11. April 2024 um 10:36
> An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
> Betreff: Splitting up the repos
> Hi all,
>
> so now that the new repo is created (https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/iotdb-extras.git, but please don’t push anything there just yet), we would need to decide on which parts should be moved there.
>
>
>   *   “distribution”: Here I think we need to split the distribution. Keeping the distributions containing only core in the main repo and adding a new distribution module in the extras repo, that contains the downstream components.
>   *   “example” (which I would propose to rename to examples as it contains multiple)
>   *   “iotdb-connector”
>
>
> As it seems that in the integration-tests there are no tests testing the connectors, I guess we can leave that as it is.
>
> Now the problem is: There are multiple options to split up the repo and keeping the entire history.
>
>   1.  Split out one directory in a separate branch and then merge all branches into an empty new one
>   2.  Use the filter plugin to strip out all commits that match a regexp
>   3.  Simply ignore the history, copy the files to the new repo and delete them from the old.
>
> 3 is the simples, but the person doing the move will be marked as author. In general this is not that problematic, as the integration modules and the examples are usually not that complex, but I would understand, if people wanted to keep the history.
>
> Option 1 is probably the most work, but the most robust option, as with option 2, I had to give up when doing the PLC4X split as there were bugs and issues in the tooling.
>
> So, if nobody objects and we’ve decided on what should be moved, I personally would opt for option 3.
>
> Chris

AW: Splitting up the repos

Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.

Hi all,

So, I’ve set a tag on the main repository “before-moving-extras” (https://github.com/apache/iotdb/releases/tag/before-moving-extras)

Also have I copied the content of the examples and integration modules to the new repo, duplicated the build there and updated the versions to artifacts in the main repo to reference a variable.

The build in the extras seems to work, now I’ll have to strip out configurations, dependency management etc. for stuff that’s not needed in the extras and do the same in the main repo.

Chris

Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
Datum: Montag, 15. April 2024 um 09:22
An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
Betreff: AW: Splitting up the repos
Ok …

So, no comment I will simply treat as lazy consensus, therefore I will move forward with tagging the main repo with the latest changes as last revision before the split and reference that in the commit to the new repo.
Then I’ll simply copy over the files and delete them from the main repo.

As with other projects however, I really dislike this form of workting together. Defaulting back to lazy consensus costs a lot of valuable time as I have to wait a reasonable amount of time. If I had gotten any “sure … I’m fine with you doing X” I could have long finished this.

In the future it would be a lot better, if some people would actually reply.

Chris

Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
Datum: Donnerstag, 11. April 2024 um 10:36
An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
Betreff: Splitting up the repos
Hi all,

As it seems that in the integration-tests there are no tests testing the connectors, I guess we can leave that as it is.

Now the problem is: There are multiple options to split up the repo and keeping the entire history.

Option 1 is probably the most work, but the most robust option, as with option 2, I had to give up when doing the PLC4X split as there were bugs and issues in the tooling.

So, if nobody objects and we’ve decided on what should be moved, I personally would opt for option 3.

Chris

AW: Splitting up the repos

Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.

Ok …

In the future it would be a lot better, if some people would actually reply.

Chris

Von: Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
Datum: Donnerstag, 11. April 2024 um 10:36
An: dev@iotdb.apache.org <de...@iotdb.apache.org>
Betreff: Splitting up the repos
Hi all,

As it seems that in the integration-tests there are no tests testing the connectors, I guess we can leave that as it is.

Now the problem is: There are multiple options to split up the repo and keeping the entire history.

Option 1 is probably the most work, but the most robust option, as with option 2, I had to give up when doing the PLC4X split as there were bugs and issues in the tooling.

So, if nobody objects and we’ve decided on what should be moved, I personally would opt for option 3.

Chris