Generally, I'd vote for 2.11 not because of any language features but
because of stability (and tooling around). 2.11 is very stable (comparing
to 2.10).
--
Nikita Ivanov
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Alexey Kuznetsov <akuznet...@gridgain.com>
wrote:
> 1. I think not so hard. We don't use any specific features of scala 2.11 in
> scalar and ignite-visor-console.
> 2. GG Visor does not depend on ignite-scalar. It uses scala 2.11 from its
> own classpath. Not a problem.
> 3. About third parties - I don't hanged a single line of code. Just
> introduced two artifacts: scalar-2.10 and scalar-2.11.
>
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Sergi Vladykin <sergi.vlady...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > How hard will it be to support both versions of Scala in the project?
> >
> > Also what do you this about GridGain's Visor, will it work with both
> > versions? I don't think we should break known third party software based
> on
> > Apache Ignite.
> >
> > Sergi
> >
> > 2015-06-01 13:50 GMT+03:00 Alexey Kuznetsov <akuznet...@gridgain.com>:
> >
> > > Igniters,
> > >
> > > We have an open issue IGNITE-389: Integration with Spark: IgniteRDD.
> > > And Spark uses Scala 2.10 (could be build with Scala 2.11).
> > > Ignite uses Scala 2.11.
> > >
> > > So we need to some how solve this situation.
> > > After some investigations (take a look in Spark pom) I found how to
> build
> > > Ignite with Scala 2.10 and Scala 2.11.
> > >
> > > But there two open questions:
> > > #1. What should be default version of Scala? I think Scala 2.10 (for
> > > compatibility with Spark out of the box).
> > >
> > > #2. We need to upload on maven two versions of modules that depend on
> > > Scala? How we should name them? I think names should be like:
> > > ignite-scalar-${scala.version}.
> > >
> > > Any comments?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Alexey Kuznetsov
> > > GridGain Systems
> > > www.gridgain.com
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Alexey Kuznetsov
> GridGain Systems
> www.gridgain.com
>
