https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IMPALA-7190
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 5:20 PM, Greg Rahn <greg.r...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 for spring cleaning (or I guess now technically summer) =) > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 2:27 AM Quanlong Huang <huang_quanl...@126.com> > wrote: > > > > +1, especially if this helps reducing your work on fixing the recent > broken/flaky tests. > > > > Thanks for your hard working on this wonderful product! > > > > > > -- Quanlong > > > > > > At 2018-06-20 04:12:38, "Jim Apple" <jbap...@cloudera.com.INVALID> > wrote: > > >I'm convinced. This is enough deprecation notice for me. > > > > > >On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 8:25 AM, Tim Armstrong > > ><tarmstr...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote: > > >> I don't think we need to bump a major version to remove something > that we > > >> never claimed to support though. The docs are pretty clear: > > >> > > >> https://impala.apache.org/docs/build/html/topics/impala_ > allow_unsupported_formats.html > > >> > > >> "An obsolete query option from early work on support for file > formats. Do > > >> not use. Might be removed in the future." > > >> > > >> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 10:16 PM, Jim Apple > <jbap...@cloudera.com.invalid> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> As for the time zone case, I’d like to be careful about versioning. > If we > > >>> remove Avro, that seems like a breaking changedeserving of a major > version > > >>> bump. > > >>> > > >>> It might be worth taking a survey wider than dev@. User@ or the > customers > > >>> of Impala packagers might be good places to start. > > >>> > > >>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 5:10 PM Tim Armstrong > > >>> <tarmstr...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> > For a few years now we've had write support for Sequence, Avro and > > >>> > compressed text hidden behind a query option. We haven't really > made any > > >>> > progress on turning it into a supported feature, so I'm wondering > if we > > >>> > should remove the code and save some overhead of building, testing > and > > >>> code > > >>> > maintenance. > > >>> > > > >>> > I know I've found it useful once or twice to generate test data > but I > > >>> don't > > >>> > think this is enough to justify maintaining it. > > >>> > > > >>> > It seems like we should get it out of this in-between state - > either > > >>> delete > > >>> > the code or get it to the point where it's supported and tested. > If we > > >>> > delete it, it's always possible for someone to resurrect it later. > > >>> > > > >>> > What do people think? > > >>> > > > >>> > - Tim > > >>> > > > >>> >
