A second thought on this. I wonder how it is going to work. The test suite probably will run with old Jackson version with the compile. We will ship what we don't test with? Whatever we do seem to imply similarly small risk ... On Apr 25, 2015 8:02 PM, "Nick Dimiduk" <ndimi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm game for giving it a shot if we can build some confidence it won't > cause other issues. However given we're moving to Hadoop 2.6 I think we've > already relaxed the constraints and this won't buy us much. More trouble > than it's worth? > > On Saturday, April 25, 2015, Jerry He <jerry...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > This is an interesting idea from Sean. > > > > > On the Jackson thing, are folks opposed to compiling with the current > > older > > > version and then packaging the newer version? That would make sure we > > don't > > > start using 1.9 features in a way that would prevent downstream users > > from > > > downgrading to 1.8, which combined with a release note would address my > > > concerns. > > > > I wonder if people have objections or concerns on this. Maybe cause > > confusion down the road, or in the pom or assembly? > > > > Looks like we are moving in the direction of relaxing a little, and > upgrade > > Jackson in HBase 1.1. > > > > Jerry > > >
