No, I think our intent is that using a deprecated language version can generate warnings, but that it should still work; whereas once we remove support for a language version, then it really is ok for Spark developers to do things not compatible with that version and for users attempting to use that version to encounter errors.
OK, understood. With that understanding, the first steps toward removing support for Scala 2.10 and/or Java 7 would be to deprecate them in 2.1.0. Actual removal of support could then occur at the earliest in 2.2.0. Java 7 is already deprecated per the 2.0 release notes which I linked to. Here they are <http://spark.apache.org/releases/spark-release-2-0-0.html#deprecations> again. On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 3:19 PM Mark Hamstra <m...@clearstorydata.com> wrote: > No, I think our intent is that using a deprecated language version can > generate warnings, but that it should still work; whereas once we remove > support for a language version, then it really is ok for Spark developers to > do things not compatible with that version and for users attempting to use > that version to encounter errors. > > With that understanding, the first steps toward removing support for Scala > 2.10 and/or Java 7 would be to deprecate them in 2.1.0. Actual removal of > support could then occur at the earliest in 2.2.0. > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Nicholas Chammas < > nicholas.cham...@gmail.com> wrote: > > FYI: Support for both Python 2.6 and Java 7 was deprecated in 2.0 (see release > notes <http://spark.apache.org/releases/spark-release-2-0-0.html> under > Deprecations). The deprecation notice didn't offer a specific timeline for > completely dropping support other than to say they "might be removed in > future versions of Spark 2.x". > > Not sure what the distinction between deprecating and dropping support is > for language versions, since in both cases it seems like it's OK to do > things not compatible with the deprecated versions. > > Nick > > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 11:50 AM Holden Karau <hol...@pigscanfly.ca> > wrote: > > I'd also like to add Python 2.6 to the list of things. We've considered > dropping it before but never followed through to the best of my knowledge > (although on mobile right now so can't double check). > > On Tuesday, October 25, 2016, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > I'd like to gauge where people stand on the issue of dropping support for > a few things that were considered for 2.0. > > First: Scala 2.10. We've seen a number of build breakages this week > because the PR builder only tests 2.11. No big deal at this stage, but, it > did cause me to wonder whether it's time to plan to drop 2.10 support, > especially with 2.12 coming soon. > > Next, Java 7. It's reasonably old and out of public updates at this stage. > It's not that painful to keep supporting, to be honest. It would simplify > some bits of code, some scripts, some testing. > > Hadoop versions: I think the the general argument is that most anyone > would be using, at the least, 2.6, and it would simplify some code that has > to reflect to use not-even-that-new APIs. It would remove some moderate > complexity in the build. > > > "When" is a tricky question. Although it's a little aggressive for minor > releases, I think these will all happen before 3.x regardless. 2.1.0 is not > out of the question, though coming soon. What about ... 2.2.0? > > > Although I tend to favor dropping support, I'm mostly asking for current > opinions. > > > > -- > Cell : 425-233-8271 <(425)%20233-8271> > Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau > > >
