[hibernate-dev] [Hibernate Search] Donating some of our source code to Infinispan

[Sanne Grinovero]

On 26 January 2015 at 09:45, Hardy Ferentschik <hardy at hibernate.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sounds like a reasonable plan. I am just wondering what happened with the idea
> of creating a standalone repository for the Infinispan Lucene Directory
> (I guess that implies moving things from Inifinispan and Search into a new repo)?
> I think this was our most favoured plan until now. IMO this has even more
> flexibility as the move to Infinispan.

We had identified several issues with that. I don't remember them all,
but was discussed on both mailing lists, some problems as I remember
them include:
 - it doesn't relax coupling but would require a specific version of
Infinispan and a specific of version Search
 - compatibility would break for ANY of: Lucene API change, Search API
change, Infinispan API change
 - you'd need a release of such a module for each combination of
versions as it's likely to break often
 - such a module's versioning scheme would be something like "module
for Search 5 & Infinispan 6 review 0.1" because of the coupling

>
> Also it should be in the interest of Infinispan as well to split things out,
> given how many modules they already have. I think smaller independent "projects"
> is more favourable than this huge monolithic multi-module setups. It also
> comes with additional flexibility when it comes to releasing.

Maybe, I'm sceptical but not ruling that out. What matters for us is
to hook up that module to their release process and versioning scheme
rather than ours; how Infinispan decides to organize their sources is
an evolution they can make on their own if need arises.


> In case we co ahead with moving the code to Infinispan:
>
>>  A) Should the Maven group id be changed? I'd expect it to be
>> transferred to "org.infinispan" group at least, and probably need a
>> better artifact id too.
>
> +1 At least group id needs top change.
>
>>  B) License. Our code is LGPL, most of Infinispan is ASL - but not all
>> of it. So I expect it would be possible to keep the existing license
>> at least for now, and defer eventual license changes as a separate
>> step (if people feel need for any change at all).
>
> Would it not be easier to change to ASL?

"Involve Legal" ~ "easier" ??
Maybe, but I'm suggesting I hope that any such process would be
asynchronous compared to the practicalities for us of moving the code.

>>  C) Documentation. Besides the needed updates in Maven coordinates /
>> download sources, I don't expect much of a difference: we'd still
>> explain how to set this integration up.
>
> +1
>
>> I think we should drop these from our distribution
>
> +1
>
> --Hardy

Thanks!
Sanne