munch munch munch... this popcorn is nice... having a hard time keeping stum... :-)
- Stephen --- Sent from my Android phone, so random spelling mistakes, random nonsense words and other nonsense are a direct result of using swype to type on the screen On 10 Jul 2011 04:30, "Rick Shaw" <wfs...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jul 7, 2011, at 10:53 AM, Eric Evans wrote: > >> On Wed, 2011-07-06 at 13:33 -0500, Jonathan Ellis wrote: >>> - the git mirror won't pick up anything under drivers/ >> >> Has there been any effort made to have INFRA add it? >> It was separated out to make it look/act like an independent project. Cant we get an additional GIT project for drivers? >> >>> - building the Java drivers is fragile and complicated, and there's a >>> lot of duplication with the "main" ant build >> >> Fragile how so? Because of the build-dependency on Cassandra (and/or >> how it is satisfied)? > > Yes. >> >> What duplication are you referring to? I don't see much beyond all of >> the boilerplate you'd see between any two ant projects. > >>Wow I would hardly call the current build for C* boilerplate. It is quite comprehensive but very elaborate and complicate. A lot of clever expertise has been applied. >>Duplicating the necessary functionality and reaching into another existing source tree is just complicated and error prone. Not impossible, but fragile seems a good >description. >> >>> - patches that affect both Cassandra and JDBC are cumbersome since >>> they have to be committed separately (e.g. >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2857) >> >> Well, the idea of moving it was to be able to treat it as a separate >> project (more or less), so it follows that you'd have to independently >> patch anything using AbstractCassandraDaemon. > >>This is a problem that cant be helped if they are separate projects. RIght? >> >> Well, it follows that if we change an API that any project using it will >> need to be updated as well. Since the idea behind moving the drivers >> was to be able to treat them as separate projects, it follows that we'd >> have to do it here as well. >> >>> I'm inclined to think we should move it back to trunk (but not have >>> multiple versions for 0.8 branch). We can still tag/branch separately >>> from there. >> >> What do you mean by "but not have multiple versions for 0.8 branch"? > >>I like the idea of it being being built as a separate project. But I also like it being in the main trunk. Is it possible to have both? > >>Can't we keep the /drivers code in the trunk and just have separate Ant tasks for building the driver parts independent of the tasks for for the server? >> Another thought would be to keep it in the separate tree as it is now, and dumb down the driver build to just build the JAR artifacts (binary, source, and javadoc). and do all testing and integration work in the server-side trunk by using just the Driver jar as a dependency for the tests in the server tree? >> >> -- >> Eric Evans >> eev...@rackspace.com >> >
