Github user jaceklaskowski closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8753
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8753#issuecomment-143797926
@jaceklaskowski could you close this PR please? thanks
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If
Github user srowen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8753#issuecomment-141068481
(Do you mind closing this PR? the next step would be a different discussion
or change.)
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user jaceklaskowski commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8753#issuecomment-140414166
Should we then move the discussion to the mailing list and/or creating a
task in JIRA?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and
Github user srowen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8753#issuecomment-140414831
I think it's fine to highlight this discussion on the user list (can just
point to it) and ask if anyone has more opinions. It's OK to close this PR but
still continue a
Github user srowen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8753#issuecomment-140206085
Type and default value are good points. That adds a lot over merely
factoring out the name.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
Github user jaceklaskowski commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8753#issuecomment-140193323
Is this better discussed on the user or dev mailing lists? I disagree on
the use of another dependency hop using such an object, but can agree with you
on doing
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8753#issuecomment-140197679
I think SPARK-529 used to be a tracking bug for this, but Sean (err) closed
it... I even had a patch at some point to implement it, but people didn't like
it because it
Github user srowen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8753#issuecomment-140199709
(I think that one was closed from no activity, which maybe says something.
It was more about recording consistent default values?)
The upshot is certainly
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8753#issuecomment-140206475
Yeah, I'm not necessarily arguing for this PR (haven't really looked at the
code), but for the idea of centralizing this information somewhere (even if
it's in a
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8753#issuecomment-140205806
It's not just typos; it encapsulates several things about the config option
in a single place:
- name
- type
- default value
Right now, every place
GitHub user jaceklaskowski opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8753
Introduce config constants object
A small refactoring to introduce a Scala object to keep
property/environment names in a single place for YARN cluster deployment first
(as I hate seeing
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8753#issuecomment-140176928
Can one of the admins verify this patch?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your
Github user srowen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8753#issuecomment-140183180
@jaceklaskowski A lot of your PRs do not have JIRAs. That's OK for
something very trivial but I'd have to push back on you now to follow
14 matches
Mail list logo
