We can certainly provide a build for Scala 2.12, even in 2.x.

On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:17 AM, Justin Miller <
justin.mil...@protectwise.com> wrote:

> Would that mean supporting both 2.12 and 2.11? Could be a while before
> some of our libraries are off of 2.11.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> On Jan 19, 2018, at 10:53 AM, Koert Kuipers <ko...@tresata.com> wrote:
>
> i was expecting to be able to move to scala 2.12 sometime this year
>
> if this cannot be done in spark 2.x then that could be a compelling reason
> to move spark 3 up to 2018 i think
>
> hadoop 3 sounds great but personally i have no use case for it yet
>
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 12:31 PM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
>> Forking this thread to muse about Spark 3. Like Spark 2, I assume it
>> would be more about making all those accumulated breaking changes and
>> updating lots of dependencies. Hadoop 3 looms large in that list as well as
>> Scala 2.12.
>>
>> Spark 1 was release in May 2014, and Spark 2 in July 2016. If Spark 2.3
>> is out in Feb 2018 and it takes the now-usual 6 months until a next
>> release, Spark 3 could reasonably be next.
>>
>> However the release cycles are naturally slowing down, and it could also
>> be said that 2019 would be more on schedule for Spark 3.
>>
>> Nothing particularly urgent about deciding, but I'm curious if anyone had
>> an opinion on whether to move on to Spark 3 next or just continue with 2.4
>> later this year.
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 11:13 AM Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, if users are using Kryo directly, they should be insulated from a
>>> Spark-side change because of shading.
>>> However this also entails updating (unshaded) Chill from 0.8.x to 0.9.x.
>>> I am not sure if that causes problems for apps.
>>>
>>> Normally I'd avoid any major-version change in a minor release. This one
>>> looked potentially entirely internal.
>>> I think if there are any doubts, we can leave it for Spark 3. There was
>>> a bug report that needed a fix from Kryo 4, but it might be minor after all.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>

Reply via email to