[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-5073?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12751614#action_12751614
]
Tsz Wo (Nicholas), SZE commented on HADOOP-5073:
------------------------------------------------
> Clearly, Nicholas would like 2. Personally, I think we should do 1. Having
> the annotations flow down is problematic if it flows from public interfaces
> into the private implementations....
Yes, I prefer 2 but I am open to 1.
BTW, should the value (or target) of LimitedPrivate be enum? Otherwise,
someone may incorrectly annotate something with typos like the following:
{code}
@Audience.LimitedPrivate({"Pi", "Owl", "Zebra"}) //Oops, it is supposed to be
used by the Pig project,
//not the Pi programs.
public class HelloWorld {
}
{code}
> Hadoop 1.0 Interface Classification - scope (visibility - public/private) and
> stability
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-5073
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-5073
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Sanjay Radia
> Assignee: Sanjay Radia
> Attachments: 5073_demo.png, c5073_20090825.patch, c5073_20090825.png,
> HADOOP-5073.patch, Nested.png, Picture 1.png
>
>
> This jira proposes an interface classification for hadoop interfaces.
> The discussion was started in email alias core-...@hadoop.apache.org in Nov
> 2008.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
