Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Audit v3 proto package structure #8121

Closed
htuch opened this issue Sep 2, 2019 · 7 comments
Closed

Audit v3 proto package structure #8121

htuch opened this issue Sep 2, 2019 · 7 comments
Labels
api/v3 Major version release @ end of Q3 2019 help wanted Needs help!
Milestone
1.13.0

Comments

@htuch
Copy link
Member

htuch commented Sep 2, 2019

As part of the v3 work, we should re-evaluate the package tree structure to ensure that the decisions made in v2 are still working for us and see what might need tweaking. This should not be a radical restructuring, we should be working along the margins ideally.
@htuch htuch self-assigned this Sep 2, 2019
@htuch htuch added api/v3 Major version release @ end of Q3 2019 no stalebot Disables stalebot from closing an issue labels Sep 2, 2019
@htuch htuch added this to the 1.12.0 milestone Sep 2, 2019
@mattklein123
Copy link
Member

@htuch one of things I think we should do here is split out extension configs to better match the source code. Right now they are intermingled in the config directory. So I would suggest an extensions directory with the same structure as the source code.

@htuch
Copy link
Member Author

htuch commented Sep 26, 2019

@mattklein123 flagging this one as being potentially too high churn given everything else going on in v3. This reorganization is very easy to do though via protoxform and reflection translation, so I think we might still consider it.

@htuch
Copy link
Member Author

htuch commented Oct 4, 2019

Related is #8490. Also, various common packages are unversioned today. We should move them to a versioned scheme to support API evolution for these components.

@htuch htuch modified the milestones: 1.12.0, 1.13.0 Oct 16, 2019
@htuch
Copy link
Member Author

htuch commented Nov 7, 2019

Re: extensions, @mattklein123 have discussed offline the need to have better consistency between the handcrafted RST docs for extensions and the API generated docs, in particular in light of #8906. Leaving this comment to track further work here.

@htuch
Copy link
Member Author

htuch commented Nov 21, 2019

Related to #8120

@htuch htuch added help wanted Needs help! and removed no stalebot Disables stalebot from closing an issue labels Nov 21, 2019
@htuch htuch removed their assignment Nov 21, 2019
@htuch
Copy link
Member Author

htuch commented Nov 21, 2019

I'm marking this help wanted and unassigning myself. Technically the implementation of this issue is dependent on us completing the package rename support in the v2 --> v3 tooling, but there is a bunch of parallelism possible; we can have someone do a design proposal for the new package layout and do community discussion, achieve buy-in, and then execute when tooling is available for package movement.

@lizan lizan mentioned this issue Jan 3, 2020
Merged
lizan added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 3, 2020
@lizan
rename packages (#9515)
1371f2e 
Description:
Move packages around for #8120 and #8121

Risk Level: Med around messing up build.
Testing: CI
Docs Changes: in API/STYLE.md
Release Notes: N/A (v3alpha is not in use yet)
Fixes #8120

Signed-off-by: Lizan Zhou <lizan@tetrate.io>
@htuch
Copy link
Member Author

htuch commented Jan 7, 2020

This was completed in #9515 and #9555.

@htuch htuch closed this as completed Jan 7, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
api/v3 Major version release @ end of Q3 2019 help wanted Needs help!
Projects
None yet
Milestone
1.13.0
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@mattklein123 @htuch