On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 11:52AM, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 01.06.2015 18:06, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Nikita Ivanov <nivano...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> 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). > >> > > If we go with 2.11, how do we make it work with Spark which runs on Scala > > 2.10? > > Teach Spark to use Scala 2.11, of course. > > I find it inconceivable that minor Scala versions are incompatible to > this extent. Looks like a major fail to me ... but not that uncommon, > notice that Ruby has the same lack of backward compatibility.
A need to support of 2 *minor* versions of Scala is ludicrous, of course. [...snipping my own muttering about Scala infamous backward compatibility...] But here's another catch: if both dev. env. for 2.10 and 2.11 would be required in order to build Ignite it will complicate the life of the downstream integrators, most obviously Bigtop, where we'll have to support 2 versions of Scala in the toolchain. Which it unlikely to happen as Bigtop isn't in business of paying for silly Scala decisions. Cos
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
