Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
HBase >> mail # dev >> Binary API compatibility is not a requirement for any 0.98 release candidate


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Binary API compatibility is not a requirement for any 0.98 release candidate
True. I think the difference here is that the KV stuff and comparator stuff
was marked that InterfaceAudience.Private for 0.96, and Scan was
InterfaceAudience.Public/InterfaceStability.Stable for 0.96.

The stronger markings mean we should really enforce the deprecation policy
in 0.98. .

Jon.
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Jon,
>
> I find your "ship has sailed here" phrasing a bit odd because it was your
> changes to KV comparators that kicked off the original discussion on binary
> compatibility and, then, an agreement that binary API compat not be a
> criteria for 0.98 releases. Otherwise it would have been. :-)
>
> On Feb 4, 2014, at 2:46 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Andrew,
>
> I basically agree with lars here -- the ship has sailed here. However,
> there are some patches that restored binary compat in places committed to
> 0.98 already.  (IMO actually this would be an argument to fork earlier in
> the future)
>
> I have some comments on HBASE-10460.  Specifically it is on a class that
> is @InterfaceAudience.Public and @InterfaceStability.Stable -- and I think
> they fix there should get into 0.98.
>
> Jon.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 9:46 PM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> My $0.02...
>>
>> Wire (client-server and server-server) compatibility is a must have.
>> Binary compatibility should be a best effort. I.e. we shouldn't go out of
>> our way to break things, but if we want to clean up an API we should do
>> that.
>> So much for 0.98.
>>
>> Going forward...
>>
>> Once we go past version 1.0 and to semantic versioning this will need a
>> bigger discussion.
>>
>> As discussed in the past there are at least four angles here:
>> 1. Client-server wire compatibility
>> 2. Server-server wire compatibility
>> 3. Client binary compatibility
>> 4. Server interface binary compatibility (for coprocessors)
>>
>> #4 is surprisingly important as it basically turns into a #1 problem when
>> a project ships with coprocessors.
>>
>> Then we need to define compatibility rules for major/minor/patch versions.
>> In the last PMC meeting we had a start on this. We need to finish the
>> details.
>>
>> -- Lars
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Monday, February 3, 2014 3:08 PM
>> Subject: Binary API compatibility is not a requirement for any 0.98
>> release candidate
>>
>> If you would like to change this consensus now, we can do so, and add it
>> as
>> a release criterion. That would require undoing the comparator cleanups
>> and
>> related breaking changes that went in as HBASE-9245 and subtasks. So let's
>> not. I am -1 on making a change like this late in the day, after we have
>> already had two RCs and I am hoping to get a third out tomorrow.
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>>
>>    - Andy
>>
>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>> (via Tom White)
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> // HBase Tech Lead, Software Engineer, Cloudera
> // [EMAIL PROTECTED] // @jmhsieh
>
>
>
--
// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// HBase Tech Lead, Software Engineer, Cloudera
// [EMAIL PROTECTED] // @jmhsieh

 
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB