My apologies, my intention was that it is fine for the next minor *or*major release, regardless of what comes next. I only wanted to distinguish that from the next maintenance release, since my understanding is that we wish to avoid changing dependencies during maintenance releases.
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Mark Hamstra <m...@clearstorydata.com>wrote: > > > > The situation sounds fine for the next minor release... > > > I don't understand what you mean by this. According to my current > understanding, the next release of Spark other than maintenance releases on > 0.9.x is intended to be a major release, 1.0.0, and there are no plans for > an intervening minor release, which would be 0.10.0. Thus "the next minor > release" would be 1.1.0, and I fail to see why we would wait for that > instead of putting the dependency change (assuming that it is something > that we do, indeed, want) in 1.0.0. > > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 7:51 PM, aarondav <g...@git.apache.org> wrote: > > > Github user aarondav commented on the pull request: > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/582#issuecomment-34836430 > > > > Thanks for looking into it! The situation sounds fine for the next > > minor release, and I don't think this patch needs to be included in the > > next maintenance release anyway (following your very own [suggestion]( > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spark-dev/201402.mbox/browser) > > on the dev list). > > > > While this patch looks good to me, I am not sure I fully understand > > the need for it. I posted my question on the [dev list thread]( > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spark-dev/201402.mbox/%3C945190638.685798.1391974088596.JavaMail.zimbra%40redhat.com%3E > ). > > Besides the dependency change, you also mention performance improvements. > > [This benchmark]( > > http://engineering.ooyala.com/blog/comparing-scala-json-libraries) does > > show Jackson outperforming lift on a particular workload, but do you have > > another source showing how the relative performance changes with input > size? > > > > >
