I think one of the key problems here are the required dependency upgrades. It would mean many minor breaking changes and a few bigger ones, notably around Hive, and forces a scala 2.12-only update. I think my question is whether that even makes sense as a minor release? it wouldn't be backwards compatible with 2.4 enough to call it a low-risk update. It would be a smaller step than moving all the way to 3.0, sure. I am not super against it, but we have to keep in mind how much work it would then be to maintain two LTS 2.x releases, 2.4 and the sort-of-compatible 2.5, while proceeding with 3.x.
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 2:01 PM DB Tsai <d_t...@apple.com.invalid> wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > Thank you all for working on supporting JDK11 in Apache Spark 3.0 as a > community. > > Java 8 is already end of life for commercial users, and many companies are > moving to Java 11. > The release date for Apache Spark 3.0 is still not there yet, and there are > many API > incompatibility issues when upgrading from Spark 2.x. As a result, asking > users to move to > Spark 3.0 to use JDK 11 is not realistic. > > Should we backport PRs for JDK11 and cut a release in 2.x to support JDK11? > > Should we cut a new Apache Spark 2.5 since the patches involve some of the > dependencies changes > which is not desired in minor release? > > Thanks. > > DB Tsai | Siri Open Source Technologies [not a contribution] | Apple, > Inc > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
