Okay, I took a look at the PR and I think it should be okay. The new classes are unfortunately public, but are in catalyst which is considered private. So this is the approach we discussed.
I'm fine with the commit, other than the fact that it violated ASF norms <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html> to commit without waiting for a review. On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 10:00 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com> wrote: > Why was https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28523 merged with a -1? We > discussed this months ago and concluded that it was a bad idea to introduce > a new v2 API that cannot have reliable behavior across sources. > > The last time I checked that PR, the approach I discussed with Tathagata > was to not add update mode to DSv2. Instead, Tathagata gave a couple of > reasonable options to avoid it. Why were those not done? > > This is the second time this year that a PR with a -1 was merged. Does the > Spark community not follow the convention to build consensus before merging > changes? > > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 12:13 AM Wenchen Fan <cloud0...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Seems the priority of SPARK-31706 is incorrectly marked, and it's a >> blocker now. The fix was merged just a few hours ago. >> >> This should be a -1 for RC2. >> >> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 2:42 PM rickestcode <matthias.harder...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sent from: http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/ >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org >>> >>> > > -- > Ryan Blue > Software Engineer > Netflix > -- Ryan Blue Software Engineer Netflix
