To be clear-er, I don't think it's clear yet whether a 1.7 release should exist or not. I could see both making sense. It's also not really necessary to decide now, well before a 1.6 is even out in the field. Deleting the version lost information, and I would not have done that given my reply. Reynold maybe I can take this up with you offline.
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Mark Hamstra <m...@clearstorydata.com> wrote: > Reynold's post fromNov. 25: > >> I don't think we should drop support for Scala 2.10, or make it harder in >> terms of operations for people to upgrade. >> >> If there are further objections, I'm going to bump remove the 1.7 version >> and retarget things to 2.0 on JIRA. > > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 12:47 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote: >> >> Reynold, did you (or someone else) delete version 1.7.0 in JIRA? I >> think that's premature. If there's a 1.7.0 then we've lost info about >> what it would contain. It's trivial at any later point to merge the >> versions. And, since things change and there's not a pressing need to >> decide one way or the other, it seems fine to at least collect this >> info like we have things like "1.4.3" that may never be released. I'd >> like to add it back? >> >> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote: >> > Maintaining both a 1.7 and 2.0 is too much work for the project, which >> > is over-stretched now. This means that after 1.6 it's just small >> > maintenance releases in 1.x and no substantial features or evolution. >> > This means that the "in progress" APIs in 1.x that will stay that way, >> > unless one updates to 2.x. It's not unreasonable, but means the update >> > to the 2.x line isn't going to be that optional for users. >> > >> > Scala 2.10 is already EOL right? Supporting it in 2.x means supporting >> > it for a couple years, note. 2.10 is still used today, but that's the >> > point of the current stable 1.x release in general: if you want to >> > stick to current dependencies, stick to the current release. Although >> > I think that's the right way to think about support across major >> > versions in general, I can see that 2.x is more of a required update >> > for those following the project's fixes and releases. Hence may indeed >> > be important to just keep supporting 2.10. >> > >> > I can't see supporting 2.12 at the same time (right?). Is that a >> > concern? it will be long since GA by the time 2.x is first released. >> > >> > There's another fairly coherent worldview where development continues >> > in 1.7 and focuses on finishing the loose ends and lots of bug fixing. >> > 2.0 is delayed somewhat into next year, and by that time supporting >> > 2.11+2.12 and Java 8 looks more feasible and more in tune with >> > currently deployed versions. >> > >> > I can't say I have a strong view but I personally hadn't imagined 2.x >> > would start now. >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com> >> > wrote: >> >> I don't think we should drop support for Scala 2.10, or make it harder >> >> in >> >> terms of operations for people to upgrade. >> >> >> >> If there are further objections, I'm going to bump remove the 1.7 >> >> version >> >> and retarget things to 2.0 on JIRA. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@spark.apache.org
