Before moving to 1.0, I think the public APIs should be refactored a bit. (UDFs, ...: all the classes users extend or use)
Some of the Pig APIs have grown organically and would need changes.
- inconsistencies between EvalFunc and Accumulator
- Algebraic UDFs can not pass FuncSpec parameters to initial,intermed and final
- UDFContext should be injected to the UDFs
- all classes/interfaces that user can depend on should be grouped in a separate package (api vs implementation)
Of course this would be done in a soft manner (supporting both APIs for a while)
Now if there's a majority of people that think this can be done after 1.0 I don't have a strong opinion about this.
On 3/8/11 8:09 AM, "Dmitriy Ryaboy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Olga I would really rather take this vote when we are closer to knowing
what's in the release, and have had some experience running 0.9. This vote
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 1:57 AM, Mridul Muralidharan
> As I elaborated before, given state of pig project, I would vote "-1" on
> next release being 1.0
> Ofcourse, it is as mentioned, non binding :-)
> On Tuesday 08 March 2011 04:51 AM, Olga Natkovich wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>> We had a lively discussion last week regarding what version number to
>> assign to the major release following Pig 0.9. The discussion can be seen
>> here: http://tinyurl.com/4ng8upa.
>> Based on the discussion, it seemed that most people were on-board with
>> making next release Pig 1.0 as long as we have done good job stabilizing
>> post Pig 0.9.
>> I would like to call vote on calling the release Pig 1.0. I believe it is
>> important to finalize the version number prior to starting the work on the
>> release. I believe that this vote is part of Product Release Action and as
>> such is subject to Lazy Majority vote: http://pig.apache.org/bylaws.html.
>> Please, complete the vote by the end of this Thursday, 3/10. Please, note
>> that anybody is welcome to vote but only PMC votes are binding.