+1 for singing telegram
Russell Jurney http://datasyndrome.com
On Apr 19, 2013, at 12:30 AM, Bill Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Gerrit,
> Sorry to hear these changes caused you problems. The PPNL interface is
> marked as Evolving, so it should be expected that future releases of that
> interface will change (i.e. break). I'm open for ways to better communicate
> these changes when they occur besides the current release notes process.
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Dmitriy Ryaboy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi Gerrit, we do try to keep backwards incompatible changes to a minimum,
>> but sometimes they are needed to make progress. How about we make a
>> practice of tagging notifications about new pig release candidates with
>> [RC] so you can set up your filters and get a heads up to try your software
>> with the latest release candidate? That will at least let you prepare for
>> changes before a release is made, or perhaps argue that we should revert
>> something that is backwards incompatible.
>> On Apr 18, 2013, at 2:23 AM, Gerrit Jansen van Vuuren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> I'm the developer of http://gerritjvv.github.io/glue/ that uses the Pig
>>> directly to launch pig jobs in separate JVM instances.
>>> Recently I've updated to use pig-0.11.1 and found two API compatibility
>>> PigServer.parseExecType does not exist anymore, (was a static method up
>>> New method for PigProgressNotificationListener
>>> public void initialPlanNotification(String scriptId, MROperPlan plan)
>>> It would be nice if you guys (when possible) could lookout for these kind
>>> of breaks in the future.
> *Note that I'm no longer using my Yahoo! email address. Please email me at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] going forward.*