+1 on this. I think LimitedPrivate is somewhat moot. It seems to be a better way to just get rid of it. $0.02
Cos On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 10:27AM, Tom White wrote: > Looking at current usage in Hadoop, there are only 4 LimitedPrivate > references to HBase (the http, io.retry, ipc, and metrics packages in > Common), and 2 references to Pig (the two LineRecordReader classes in > MapReduce). The other LimitedPrivate references are all to HDFS or > MapReduce. Given that Private means "Intended for use only within > Hadoop itself" (according to the javadoc), we can replace these > references with Private. > > We could also change the remaining 6 cases of LimitedPrivate to Public > (note that they are already annotated Evolving or Unstable), and > deprecate LimitedPrivate. Would this allay people's concerns? > > Cheers, > Tom > > On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Eric Baldeschwieler > <eri...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote: > > I'd like to see a proposal circulated to handle this concern in a > > maintainable way. > > > > On Jun 8, 2011, at 9:17 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > > > >>> From: Allen Wittenauer <a...@apache.org> > >>> ═ ═ OK. ═That's make it easier to just > >>> -1 changes like this with reasoning such as "HBase is not a > >>> related project." Then we can go back working on core > >>> Hadoop. > >> > >> Seriously? > >> > >> Forget what I said about filing a JIRA (and working on it) to give > >> HttpServer an extensibility that possibly would past muster with you. > >> > >> ═- Andy > >> > >> > > > >
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
