We are getting closer to being able to release a Common/HDFS/MapReduce  
1.0. I'd hope that we'll get the last set of things in to 0.22 that  
mean that it would be labelled 1.0. Toward that end, I'd like to start  
locking down the APIs that we've marked as public stable. What that  
would mean is that any interface that is tagged with the  
@InterfaceStability.Stable and @InterfaceAudience.Public in the 0.21.0  
release should not have any changes committed that require a  
recompilation of client code. This will provide a stable basis for our  
users' applications and reduce the costs of upgrades.

Clearly, I'm +1.

-- Owen

I did a quick grep, and--perhaps I'm missing something--no interfaces are
currently marked as InterfaceStability.Stable.  FileContext is the only
interface that uses the org.apache.hadoop.classification package.
 (Well, QueueManagerTestUtils has it commented out...)
Do you have a proposed list of classes to be marked
@InterfaceStability.Stable?

I think your question is whether we are committed to keeping the APIs marked
as stable in the course of 0.22 development to remain so through 1.0.  (You
wrote 0.21.0 below, but you probably meant 0.22.0.)  Yes, +1.

What's our commitment to methods that are @Deprecated within 0.22's
@InterfaceStability.Stable classes?  (I don't know that there are any, but I
bet there are or will be.)

-- Philip
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Owen O'Malley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> We are getting closer to being able to release a Common/HDFS/MapReduce 1.0.
> I'd hope that we'll get the last set of things in to 0.22 that mean that it
> would be labelled 1.0. Toward that end, I'd like to start locking down the
> APIs that we've marked as public stable. What that would mean is that any
> interface that is tagged with the @InterfaceStability.Stable and
> @InterfaceAudience.Public in the 0.21.0 release should not have any changes
> committed that require a recompilation of client code. This will provide a
> stable basis for our users' applications and reduce the costs of upgrades.
>
> Clearly, I'm +1.
>
> -- Owen
>

On Sep 25, 2009, at 10:36 AM, Philip Zeyliger wrote:

> I did a quick grep, and--perhaps I'm missing something--no  
> interfaces are
> currently marked as InterfaceStability.Stable.  FileContext is the  
> only
> interface that uses the org.apache.hadoop.classification package.
>  (Well, QueueManagerTestUtils has it commented out...)
> Do you have a proposed list of classes to be marked
> @InterfaceStability.Stable?
>
Yes, please see
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-5073?focusedCommentId=12664679&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel
#action_12664679

There is a proposal at the bottom of that comment.
(there have been a few changes proposed in that jira but that proposed  
tagging is mostly intact. I will update it shortly.)
>
> I think your question is whether we are committed to keeping the  
> APIs marked
> as stable in the course of 0.22 development to remain so through  
> 1.0.  (You
> wrote 0.21.0 below, but you probably meant 0.22.0.)  Yes, +1.
>
> What's our commitment to methods that are @Deprecated within 0.22's
> @InterfaceStability.Stable classes?  (I don't know that there are  
> any, but I
> bet there are or will be.)
>
> -- Philip
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Owen O'Malley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
> wrote:
>
> > We are getting closer to being able to release a Common/HDFS/
> MapReduce 1.0.
> > I'd hope that we'll get the last set of things in to 0.22 that  
> mean that it
> > would be labelled 1.0. Toward that end, I'd like to start locking  
> down the
> > APIs that we've marked as public stable. What that would mean is  
> that any
> > interface that is tagged with the @InterfaceStability.Stable and
> > @InterfaceAudience.Public in the 0.21.0 release should not have  
> any changes
> > committed that require a recompilation of client code. This will  
> provide a
> > stable basis for our users' applications and reduce the costs of  
> upgrades.
> >
> > Clearly, I'm +1.
> >
> > -- Owen
> >
>

Just posted updated proposed classification of interfaces.

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-5073?focusedCommentId=12759723&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel
#action_12759723

+1

-- amr

+1

Arun

On Sep 25, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Owen O'Malley wrote:

> We are getting closer to being able to release a Common/HDFS/
> MapReduce 1.0. I'd hope that we'll get the last set of things in to  
> 0.22 that mean that it would be labelled 1.0. Toward that end, I'd  
> like to start locking down the APIs that we've marked as public  
> stable. What that would mean is that any interface that is tagged  
> with the @InterfaceStability.Stable and @InterfaceAudience.Public in  
> the 0.21.0 release should not have any changes committed that  
> require a recompilation of client code. This will provide a stable  
> basis for our users' applications and reduce the costs of upgrades.
>
> Clearly, I'm +1.
>
> -- Owen

+1

On Sep 25, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Owen O'Malley wrote:

> We are getting closer to being able to release a Common/HDFS/MapReduce
> 1.0. I'd hope that we'll get the last set of things in to 0.22 that
> mean that it would be labelled 1.0. Toward that end, I'd like to start
> locking down the APIs that we've marked as public stable. What that
> would mean is that any interface that is tagged with the
> @InterfaceStability.Stable and @InterfaceAudience.Public in the 0.21.0
> release should not have any changes committed that require a
> recompilation of client code. This will provide a stable basis for our
> users' applications and reduce the costs of upgrades.
>
> Clearly, I'm +1.
>
> -- Owen
>

+1.
On Sep 25, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Owen O'Malley wrote:

> We are getting closer to being able to release a Common/HDFS/
> MapReduce 1.0. I'd hope that we'll get the last set of things in to  
> 0.22 that mean that it would be labelled 1.0. Toward that end, I'd  
> like to start locking down the APIs that we've marked as public  
> stable. What that would mean is that any interface that is tagged  
> with the @InterfaceStability.Stable and @InterfaceAudience.Public in  
> the 0.21.0 release should not have any changes committed that  
> require a recompilation of client code. This will provide a stable  
> basis for our users' applications and reduce the costs of upgrades.
>
> Clearly, I'm +1.
>
> -- Owen