Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache

If you were to have two implementations you would want to annotate the old one as deprecated immediately. I don't think you would want to commit to supporting it for more than a couple of months. How many users of the Scala MXNet interface are there in any case? And do they really view the

Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache

The namespace change is the first thing that's done for most projects that come to apache incubation How many production deployments of MXNet Scala API are out there --- 3 ? 2 ? 1.7643 ? I would think its barely a handful of them. Agree with Christopher Barber that MXNEt jumped the gun with

Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache

I'm not taking a side here, but just please consider that if you have two separate implementations for awhile, the newer one will start to diverge and over time, it will become harder and harder for the user to port his code. You may find yourself supporting the old code for much longer than you

Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache

How many people do we estimate are currently using the Scala interface? Probably the actual blast radius should be considered. If it is very small, then we can probably have more "wiggle room", so to speak. On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:00 AM, Chernov, Anton wrote: > I see (2)

Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache

that might be the last thing we want to do, i.e. keeping some code just for the namespace change, I am open to have such a PR with the assumption that 1. changing namespace is scheduled to be finished at 1.x versions (alternatives might be when we graduate as TLP) 2. breaking backward

Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache

I see (2) being the appropriate way to go. Scala code is copied to a new namespace and all the old code gets a deprecation mark which means it's only supported for backwards compatibility and will not be modified unless there will be an urgent fix. On 13.03.18, 16:52, "kellen sunderland"

Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache

Maintaining backwards compatibility never results in the prettiest code, but it seems pretty desirable here. There are relatively few files here, so I agree there's some risk but I don't think it would take too much time. Feel free to suggest alternatives Christopher. On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at

Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache

That sounds like a lot of work and it would be easy to get wrong if it is even feasible. On 3/13/18, 11:51 AM, "kellen sunderland" wrote: I don't know about aliasing a namespace in Scala, but I wonder how hard it would be to either (1) provide a fascade

Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache

re Chris: I do not have any good idea about this. On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Chris Olivier wrote: > is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala > in order to maintain backwards compatibility? > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu

Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache

is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala in order to maintain backwards compatibility? On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu wrote: > +1 > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier

Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache

+1 and additional suggestion is do it ASAP On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier wrote: > not sure I understand. How could changing a java namespace (effectively > moving the files to a different location as well as changing the package > names) be

Re: [VOTE] Disconnect all non-C API's from mxnet versioning

-1, I cannot think about a significant benefit comparing to the headache of the user still take Spark as an example if PySpark is in a separated repo, say now it's 1.0, can you tell me whether this 1.0 support Arrow integration without going to their website and carefully check which version of

Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache

I suggest the vote should call out if the change is breaking backward compatibility or not. I looked through the scala name changing thread and don't see justification for a backward incompatible change. I do agree it would be good to change the name space, but have not seen a reason why the