Re: [VOTE] Disconnect all non-C API's from mxnet versioning
-1, I cannot think about a significant benefit comparing to the headache of the user still take Spark as an example if PySpark is in a separated repo, say now it's 1.0, can you tell me whether this 1.0 support Arrow integration without going to their website and carefully check which version of Spark core is compiled with this 1.0? Even with the same release cycle, I have to remember ok, 1.0 is released at the same time with 2.3, so 1.0 must support Arrowwhy I need to remember an additional number and the association between another number and itself? the only benefit is that, if I want to break anything, I can jump 1.0 to 2.0 directly to make it feel better, the issue is back to the cost as aforementioned so, -1 (binding) (doesn't matter actually, many binding -1s there) On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:30 PM, Anirudh wrote: > -1 > Because of the customer pain-points mentioned by others. > I think for good customer experience, > all code in MXNet repository excluding submodules and 3rd party > dependencies > should map to the same version. > > Anirudh > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:17 PM, YiZhi Liu wrote: > > > Kellen, we are not talking about using wrong native package AFTER > > downloading the package. It's about deciding which version to use > > BEFORE downloading, and collecting information to debug. > > > > Copy-paste my previous words, > > > > " > > 1. It is harmful to user experience > > 1) Each time users want to use a specific feature, need to first > > check the mxnet core version, then check which frontend work with this > > core version. > > 2) Each time users have problem using a frontend (Scala/R/...) > > API, need to figure out which core version they are using. > > > > And as I describe in my #5. Imagine an inverse situation. When someone > > has a model trained by gluon 1.6.0, he want to deploy it to JVM, what > > Scala API version should he use? 1.6.0? No. And which R package > > version he should use? It is still different from either Gluon version > > or Scala API version. What a nightmare. > > " > > > > 2018-03-12 16:10 GMT-07:00 kellen sunderland < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com > > >: > > > @Rahul + Roshani, I would hear what you're saying if the user had to > > worry > > > about using the native package, but that worry is abstracted from them. > > > The scala package has a dependency on the native library and includes > the > > > native lib inside the jar. The correct lib is then bound against at > > > runtime. I don't see how a user can use the wrong library or be > confused > > > here unless the instructions on this page are incorrect: > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/tree/master/scala-package > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 12:02 AM, Rahul Huilgol < > rahulhuil...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> -1 for the frontends having different versions than the backend. It > not > > >> only creates confusion for new users, but also increases the work of > > >> developers who need to ensure compatibility. All this for a one-time > > change > > >> of namespace of a package? > > >> > > >> I think we should increase the major version number to make this > change? > > >> Why do we have to 'wait' for 2.0? Who tells us that it's time for a > 2.0 > > >> version? > > >> > > >> I think expecting a user to look up version numbers on the website and > > >> ensure compatibility as suggested above, is not a simple task. Most > > users > > >> might not even know how the backend and frontend integrate. They might > > not > > >> even know that there is a C API which powers the frontends. Even > knowing > > >> how to look up documentation for a particular version of MXNet is a > > >> non-trivial task right now. (And there are pages in a version's > > >> documentation which link to a file in another version). We should > avoid > > >> introducing more complexity into the process. As developers we tend to > > >> overlook the important aspect of user experience. I think we should > > take a > > >> step back and look at this from the perspective of a user, not from > > that of > > >> a developer who works closely with MXNet. > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> Rahul > > >> > > >> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Roshani Nagmote < > > >> roshaninagmo...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> > -1 for different versioning. > > >> > > > >> > I feel its just added confusion for users. > > >> > > > >> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:35 PM, YiZhi Liu > > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > Agree. > > >> > > > > >> > > And my reply to Marco's point, > > >> > > > > >> > > > Changing namespaces is one use-case, but there will be a lot > more > > >> with > > >> > > increasing activity - we have to take the bigger picture in mind. > > >> > > And you mentioned the CPP package as an example. > > >> > > > During analysis, we figured that a re-engineering of that API > > would > > >> be > > >> > > more appropriate and easier maintainable. > > >> > > I cannot agree as an engineer. Why not keep old API and ad
Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache
+1 and additional suggestion is do it ASAP On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier wrote: > not sure I understand. How could changing a java namespace (effectively > moving the files to a different location as well as changing the package > names) be backward-compatible? > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:02 PM Steffen Rochel > wrote: > > > I suggest the vote should call out if the change is breaking backward > > compatibility or not. > > I looked through the scala name changing thread and don't see > justification > > for a backward incompatible change. > > I do agree it would be good to change the name space, but have not seen a > > reason why the change has to be made now in backward incompatible way. > > Non-binding vote: > > +1 for backward compatible namespace change > > -1 for backward incompatible namespace change > > > > Suggest to explore package aliasing for a backward compatible change - > see > > a possible idea at > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28238520/python- > like-package-name-aliasing-in-scala > > > > > > Steffen > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Rahul Huilgol > > wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > We need to change the namespace as soon as possible. > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Roshani Nagmote < > > > roshaninagmo...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 to change the namespace > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Chris Olivier < > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > The assumption is that it would be changed more-or-less > immediately. > > > ie. > > > > > this is like a voted PR, I guess. > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Chris Olivier < > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > It is about changing the namespace. As far as I know, the > version > > > > number > > > > > > of the next release is not defined. > > > > > > At such point where a release is announced, one could comment, > vote > > > > > > whatever on the chosen version of that release, I suppose. But > > > that's > > > > > > beyond the scope of this vote, because the "next release" is not > > yet > > > > > > defined. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> Just for clarification: Is this vote about changing the > namespace > > > with > > > > > the > > > > > >> next release? > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Naveen Swamy < > mnnav...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Chris, Thanks for starting this vote. > > > > > >> > This is long pending > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > +1 to change org.apache namespace > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > >> > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > I gave my +1 for the code modification. The -1 was for Nan > > Zhus > > > > > >> proposal > > > > > >> > to > > > > > >> > > get it into 1.2. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 6:18 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > If you're tying this to a process issue, then it's no > > longer a > > > > > code > > > > > >> > > > modification technical vote. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 9:56 AM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > >> > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Right > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Chris Olivier schrieb am Mo., > 12. > > > > März > > > > > >> 2018, > > > > > >> > > > > 17:38: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Are you saying your vote is contingent upon the > outcome > > > of a > > > > > >> > separate > > > > > >> > > > > vote? > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 9:37 AM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > >> > > > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > +1 for changing the namespace > > > > > >> > > > > > > -1 for merging this change into master according to > > the > > > > > >> current > > > > > >> > > > policy > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Chris Olivier schrieb am > Mo., > > > 12. > > > > > >> März > > > > > >> > > 2018, > > > > > >> > > > > > > 17:34: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Release versioning is a separate issue or vote. > At > > > > > release > > > > > >> > time, > > > > > >> > > > > > people > > > > > >> > > > > > > > can "demand" version X or Y. This vote represents > > "do > > > > we > > > > > >> want > > > > > >> > to > > > > > >> > > > > > change > > > > > >> > > > > > > > the namespace". > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 9:30 AM, Nan Zhu < > > > > > >> > zhunanmcg...@gmail.com > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache
is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala in order to maintain backwards compatibility? On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu wrote: > +1 > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier > wrote: > > > not sure I understand. How could changing a java namespace (effectively > > moving the files to a different location as well as changing the package > > names) be backward-compatible? > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:02 PM Steffen Rochel > > > wrote: > > > > > I suggest the vote should call out if the change is breaking backward > > > compatibility or not. > > > I looked through the scala name changing thread and don't see > > justification > > > for a backward incompatible change. > > > I do agree it would be good to change the name space, but have not > seen a > > > reason why the change has to be made now in backward incompatible way. > > > Non-binding vote: > > > +1 for backward compatible namespace change > > > -1 for backward incompatible namespace change > > > > > > Suggest to explore package aliasing for a backward compatible change - > > see > > > a possible idea at > > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28238520/python- > > like-package-name-aliasing-in-scala > > > > > > > > > Steffen > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Rahul Huilgol > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > We need to change the namespace as soon as possible. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Roshani Nagmote < > > > > roshaninagmo...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 to change the namespace > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Chris Olivier < > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > The assumption is that it would be changed more-or-less > > immediately. > > > > ie. > > > > > > this is like a voted PR, I guess. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is about changing the namespace. As far as I know, the > > version > > > > > number > > > > > > > of the next release is not defined. > > > > > > > At such point where a release is announced, one could comment, > > vote > > > > > > > whatever on the chosen version of that release, I suppose. But > > > > that's > > > > > > > beyond the scope of this vote, because the "next release" is > not > > > yet > > > > > > > defined. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Just for clarification: Is this vote about changing the > > namespace > > > > with > > > > > > the > > > > > > >> next release? > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Naveen Swamy < > > mnnav...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Chris, Thanks for starting this vote. > > > > > > >> > This is long pending > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > +1 to change org.apache namespace > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > >> > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > I gave my +1 for the code modification. The -1 was for Nan > > > Zhus > > > > > > >> proposal > > > > > > >> > to > > > > > > >> > > get it into 1.2. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 6:18 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > If you're tying this to a process issue, then it's no > > > longer a > > > > > > code > > > > > > >> > > > modification technical vote. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 9:56 AM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > >> > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Right > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Chris Olivier schrieb am Mo., > > 12. > > > > > März > > > > > > >> 2018, > > > > > > >> > > > > 17:38: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Are you saying your vote is contingent upon the > > outcome > > > > of a > > > > > > >> > separate > > > > > > >> > > > > vote? > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 9:37 AM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > >> > > > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > +1 for changing the namespace > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -1 for merging this change into master according > to > > > the > > > > > > >> current > > > > > > >> > > > policy > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Chris Olivier schrieb am > > Mo., > > > > 12. > > > > > > >> März > > > > > > >> > > 2018, > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 17:34: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Release versioning is a separate issue or vote. > > At > > > > > > release > > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache
re Chris: I do not have any good idea about this. On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Chris Olivier wrote: > is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala > in order to maintain backwards compatibility? > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu wrote: > > > +1 > > > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier > > wrote: > > > > > not sure I understand. How could changing a java namespace (effectively > > > moving the files to a different location as well as changing the > package > > > names) be backward-compatible? > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:02 PM Steffen Rochel < > steffenroc...@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I suggest the vote should call out if the change is breaking backward > > > > compatibility or not. > > > > I looked through the scala name changing thread and don't see > > > justification > > > > for a backward incompatible change. > > > > I do agree it would be good to change the name space, but have not > > seen a > > > > reason why the change has to be made now in backward incompatible > way. > > > > Non-binding vote: > > > > +1 for backward compatible namespace change > > > > -1 for backward incompatible namespace change > > > > > > > > Suggest to explore package aliasing for a backward compatible change > - > > > see > > > > a possible idea at > > > > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28238520/python- > > > like-package-name-aliasing-in-scala > > > > > > > > > > > > Steffen > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Rahul Huilgol < > rahulhuil...@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > We need to change the namespace as soon as possible. > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Roshani Nagmote < > > > > > roshaninagmo...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 to change the namespace > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > The assumption is that it would be changed more-or-less > > > immediately. > > > > > ie. > > > > > > > this is like a voted PR, I guess. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is about changing the namespace. As far as I know, the > > > version > > > > > > number > > > > > > > > of the next release is not defined. > > > > > > > > At such point where a release is announced, one could > comment, > > > vote > > > > > > > > whatever on the chosen version of that release, I suppose. > But > > > > > that's > > > > > > > > beyond the scope of this vote, because the "next release" is > > not > > > > yet > > > > > > > > defined. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Just for clarification: Is this vote about changing the > > > namespace > > > > > with > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > >> next release? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Naveen Swamy < > > > mnnav...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > Chris, Thanks for starting this vote. > > > > > > > >> > This is long pending > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > +1 to change org.apache namespace > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > >> > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > I gave my +1 for the code modification. The -1 was for > Nan > > > > Zhus > > > > > > > >> proposal > > > > > > > >> > to > > > > > > > >> > > get it into 1.2. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 6:18 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > If you're tying this to a process issue, then it's no > > > > longer a > > > > > > > code > > > > > > > >> > > > modification technical vote. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 9:56 AM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > >> > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Right > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Chris Olivier schrieb am > Mo., > > > 12. > > > > > > März > > > > > > > >> 2018, > > > > > > > >> > > > > 17:38: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Are you saying your vote is contingent upon the > > > outcome > > > > > of a > > > > > > > >> > separate > > > > > > > >> > > > > vote? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 9:37 AM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > >> > > > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > +1 for changing the namesp
Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache
I don't know about aliasing a namespace in Scala, but I wonder how hard it would be to either (1) provide a fascade from the new package to the old package or (2) keep two copies of the scala code temporarily along with two copies of the JNI entry points. In both of these cases we could setup @deprecated on all public calls to the old package. On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:47 PM, Nan Zhu wrote: > re Chris: I do not have any good idea about this. > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Chris Olivier > wrote: > > > is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala > > in order to maintain backwards compatibility? > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > not sure I understand. How could changing a java namespace > (effectively > > > > moving the files to a different location as well as changing the > > package > > > > names) be backward-compatible? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:02 PM Steffen Rochel < > > steffenroc...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I suggest the vote should call out if the change is breaking > backward > > > > > compatibility or not. > > > > > I looked through the scala name changing thread and don't see > > > > justification > > > > > for a backward incompatible change. > > > > > I do agree it would be good to change the name space, but have not > > > seen a > > > > > reason why the change has to be made now in backward incompatible > > way. > > > > > Non-binding vote: > > > > > +1 for backward compatible namespace change > > > > > -1 for backward incompatible namespace change > > > > > > > > > > Suggest to explore package aliasing for a backward compatible > change > > - > > > > see > > > > > a possible idea at > > > > > > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28238520/python- > > > > like-package-name-aliasing-in-scala > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steffen > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Rahul Huilgol < > > rahulhuil...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > We need to change the namespace as soon as possible. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Roshani Nagmote < > > > > > > roshaninagmo...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 to change the namespace > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The assumption is that it would be changed more-or-less > > > > immediately. > > > > > > ie. > > > > > > > > this is like a voted PR, I guess. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is about changing the namespace. As far as I know, the > > > > version > > > > > > > number > > > > > > > > > of the next release is not defined. > > > > > > > > > At such point where a release is announced, one could > > comment, > > > > vote > > > > > > > > > whatever on the chosen version of that release, I suppose. > > But > > > > > > that's > > > > > > > > > beyond the scope of this vote, because the "next release" > is > > > not > > > > > yet > > > > > > > > > defined. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Just for clarification: Is this vote about changing the > > > > namespace > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > >> next release? > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Naveen Swamy < > > > > mnnav...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > Chris, Thanks for starting this vote. > > > > > > > > >> > This is long pending > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > +1 to change org.apache namespace > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > > >> > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > I gave my +1 for the code modification. The -1 was for > > Nan > > > > > Zhus > > > > > > > > >> proposal > > > > > > > > >> > to > > > > > > > > >> > > get it into 1.2. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 6:18 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > If you're tying this to a process issue, then it's > no > > > > > longer a > > > > > > > > code > > > > > > > > >> > > > modification technical vote. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 9:56 AM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > > >> > > > marco.g.
Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache
That sounds like a lot of work and it would be easy to get wrong if it is even feasible. On 3/13/18, 11:51 AM, "kellen sunderland" wrote: I don't know about aliasing a namespace in Scala, but I wonder how hard it would be to either (1) provide a fascade from the new package to the old package or (2) keep two copies of the scala code temporarily along with two copies of the JNI entry points. In both of these cases we could setup @deprecated on all public calls to the old package. On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:47 PM, Nan Zhu wrote: > re Chris: I do not have any good idea about this. > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Chris Olivier > wrote: > > > is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala > > in order to maintain backwards compatibility? > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > not sure I understand. How could changing a java namespace > (effectively > > > > moving the files to a different location as well as changing the > > package > > > > names) be backward-compatible? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:02 PM Steffen Rochel < > > steffenroc...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I suggest the vote should call out if the change is breaking > backward > > > > > compatibility or not. > > > > > I looked through the scala name changing thread and don't see > > > > justification > > > > > for a backward incompatible change. > > > > > I do agree it would be good to change the name space, but have not > > > seen a > > > > > reason why the change has to be made now in backward incompatible > > way. > > > > > Non-binding vote: > > > > > +1 for backward compatible namespace change > > > > > -1 for backward incompatible namespace change > > > > > > > > > > Suggest to explore package aliasing for a backward compatible > change > > - > > > > see > > > > > a possible idea at > > > > > > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28238520/python- > > > > like-package-name-aliasing-in-scala > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steffen > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Rahul Huilgol < > > rahulhuil...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > We need to change the namespace as soon as possible. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Roshani Nagmote < > > > > > > roshaninagmo...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 to change the namespace > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The assumption is that it would be changed more-or-less > > > > immediately. > > > > > > ie. > > > > > > > > this is like a voted PR, I guess. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is about changing the namespace. As far as I know, the > > > > version > > > > > > > number > > > > > > > > > of the next release is not defined. > > > > > > > > > At such point where a release is announced, one could > > comment, > > > > vote > > > > > > > > > whatever on the chosen version of that release, I suppose. > > But > > > > > > that's > > > > > > > > > beyond the scope of this vote, because the "next release" > is > > > not > > > > > yet > > > > > > > > > defined. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Just for clarification: Is this vote about changing the > > > > namespace > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > >> next release? > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Naveen Swamy < > > > > mnnav...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > Chris, Thanks for starting this vote. > > > > > > > > >> > This is long pending > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > +1 to change org.apache namespace > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > > >> > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > I gave my +1 for the code modification.
Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache
Maintaining backwards compatibility never results in the prettiest code, but it seems pretty desirable here. There are relatively few files here, so I agree there's some risk but I don't think it would take too much time. Feel free to suggest alternatives Christopher. On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:56 PM, Barber, Christopher < christopher.bar...@analog.com> wrote: > That sounds like a lot of work and it would be easy to get wrong if it is > even feasible. > > On 3/13/18, 11:51 AM, "kellen sunderland" > wrote: > > I don't know about aliasing a namespace in Scala, but I wonder how > hard it > would be to either (1) provide a fascade from the new package to the > old > package or (2) keep two copies of the scala code temporarily along > with two > copies of the JNI entry points. In both of these cases we could setup > @deprecated on all public calls to the old package. > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:47 PM, Nan Zhu > wrote: > > > re Chris: I do not have any good idea about this. > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Chris Olivier < > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala > > > in order to maintain backwards compatibility? > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier < > cjolivie...@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > not sure I understand. How could changing a java namespace > > (effectively > > > > > moving the files to a different location as well as changing > the > > > package > > > > > names) be backward-compatible? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:02 PM Steffen Rochel < > > > steffenroc...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I suggest the vote should call out if the change is breaking > > backward > > > > > > compatibility or not. > > > > > > I looked through the scala name changing thread and don't see > > > > > justification > > > > > > for a backward incompatible change. > > > > > > I do agree it would be good to change the name space, but > have not > > > > seen a > > > > > > reason why the change has to be made now in backward > incompatible > > > way. > > > > > > Non-binding vote: > > > > > > +1 for backward compatible namespace change > > > > > > -1 for backward incompatible namespace change > > > > > > > > > > > > Suggest to explore package aliasing for a backward compatible > > change > > > - > > > > > see > > > > > > a possible idea at > > > > > > > > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28238520/python- > > > > > like-package-name-aliasing-in-scala > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steffen > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Rahul Huilgol < > > > rahulhuil...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We need to change the namespace as soon as possible. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Roshani Nagmote < > > > > > > > roshaninagmo...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 to change the namespace > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The assumption is that it would be changed more-or-less > > > > > immediately. > > > > > > > ie. > > > > > > > > > this is like a voted PR, I guess. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is about changing the namespace. As far as I > know, the > > > > > version > > > > > > > > number > > > > > > > > > > of the next release is not defined. > > > > > > > > > > At such point where a release is announced, one could > > > comment, > > > > > vote > > > > > > > > > > whatever on the chosen version of that release, I > suppose. > > > But > > > > > > > that's > > > > > > > > > > beyond the scope of this vote, because the "next > release" > > is > > > > not > > > > > > yet > > > > > > > > > > defined. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Just for clarification: Is this vote about changing > the > > > > > namespace > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache
I see (2) being the appropriate way to go. Scala code is copied to a new namespace and all the old code gets a deprecation mark which means it's only supported for backwards compatibility and will not be modified unless there will be an urgent fix. On 13.03.18, 16:52, "kellen sunderland" wrote: I don't know about aliasing a namespace in Scala, but I wonder how hard it would be to either (1) provide a fascade from the new package to the old package or (2) keep two copies of the scala code temporarily along with two copies of the JNI entry points. In both of these cases we could setup @deprecated on all public calls to the old package. On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:47 PM, Nan Zhu wrote: > re Chris: I do not have any good idea about this. > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Chris Olivier > wrote: > > > is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala > > in order to maintain backwards compatibility? > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > not sure I understand. How could changing a java namespace > (effectively > > > > moving the files to a different location as well as changing the > > package > > > > names) be backward-compatible? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:02 PM Steffen Rochel < > > steffenroc...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I suggest the vote should call out if the change is breaking > backward > > > > > compatibility or not. > > > > > I looked through the scala name changing thread and don't see > > > > justification > > > > > for a backward incompatible change. > > > > > I do agree it would be good to change the name space, but have not > > > seen a > > > > > reason why the change has to be made now in backward incompatible > > way. > > > > > Non-binding vote: > > > > > +1 for backward compatible namespace change > > > > > -1 for backward incompatible namespace change > > > > > > > > > > Suggest to explore package aliasing for a backward compatible > change > > - > > > > see > > > > > a possible idea at > > > > > > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28238520/python- > > > > like-package-name-aliasing-in-scala > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steffen > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Rahul Huilgol < > > rahulhuil...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > We need to change the namespace as soon as possible. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Roshani Nagmote < > > > > > > roshaninagmo...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 to change the namespace > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The assumption is that it would be changed more-or-less > > > > immediately. > > > > > > ie. > > > > > > > > this is like a voted PR, I guess. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is about changing the namespace. As far as I know, the > > > > version > > > > > > > number > > > > > > > > > of the next release is not defined. > > > > > > > > > At such point where a release is announced, one could > > comment, > > > > vote > > > > > > > > > whatever on the chosen version of that release, I suppose. > > But > > > > > > that's > > > > > > > > > beyond the scope of this vote, because the "next release" > is > > > not > > > > > yet > > > > > > > > > defined. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Just for clarification: Is this vote about changing the > > > > namespace > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > >> next release? > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Naveen Swamy < > > > > mnnav...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > Chris, Thanks for starting this vote. > > > > > > > > >> > This is long pending > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > +1 to change org.apache namespace > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Marco de A
Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache
that might be the last thing we want to do, i.e. keeping some code just for the namespace change, I am open to have such a PR with the assumption that 1. changing namespace is scheduled to be finished at 1.x versions (alternatives might be when we graduate as TLP) 2. breaking backward compatibility in 1.x is completely unacceptable On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:00 AM, Chernov, Anton wrote: > I see (2) being the appropriate way to go. Scala code is copied to a new > namespace and all the old code gets a deprecation mark which means it's > only supported for backwards compatibility and will not be modified unless > there will be an urgent fix. > > On 13.03.18, 16:52, "kellen sunderland" > wrote: > > I don't know about aliasing a namespace in Scala, but I wonder how > hard it > would be to either (1) provide a fascade from the new package to the > old > package or (2) keep two copies of the scala code temporarily along > with two > copies of the JNI entry points. In both of these cases we could setup > @deprecated on all public calls to the old package. > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:47 PM, Nan Zhu > wrote: > > > re Chris: I do not have any good idea about this. > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Chris Olivier < > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala > > > in order to maintain backwards compatibility? > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier < > cjolivie...@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > not sure I understand. How could changing a java namespace > > (effectively > > > > > moving the files to a different location as well as changing > the > > > package > > > > > names) be backward-compatible? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:02 PM Steffen Rochel < > > > steffenroc...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I suggest the vote should call out if the change is breaking > > backward > > > > > > compatibility or not. > > > > > > I looked through the scala name changing thread and don't see > > > > > justification > > > > > > for a backward incompatible change. > > > > > > I do agree it would be good to change the name space, but > have not > > > > seen a > > > > > > reason why the change has to be made now in backward > incompatible > > > way. > > > > > > Non-binding vote: > > > > > > +1 for backward compatible namespace change > > > > > > -1 for backward incompatible namespace change > > > > > > > > > > > > Suggest to explore package aliasing for a backward compatible > > change > > > - > > > > > see > > > > > > a possible idea at > > > > > > > > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28238520/python- > > > > > like-package-name-aliasing-in-scala > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steffen > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Rahul Huilgol < > > > rahulhuil...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We need to change the namespace as soon as possible. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Roshani Nagmote < > > > > > > > roshaninagmo...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 to change the namespace > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The assumption is that it would be changed more-or-less > > > > > immediately. > > > > > > > ie. > > > > > > > > > this is like a voted PR, I guess. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is about changing the namespace. As far as I > know, the > > > > > version > > > > > > > > number > > > > > > > > > > of the next release is not defined. > > > > > > > > > > At such point where a release is announced, one could > > > comment, > > > > > vote > > > > > > > > > > whatever on the chosen version of that release, I > suppose. > > > But > > > > > > > that's > > > > > > > > > > beyond the scope of this vote, because the "next > release" > > is > > > > not > > > > > > yet > > > > > > > > > > defined. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > > > > marco.g.ab...@goo
Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache
Personally, I believe that MXNet jumped the gun on 1.0. It is pretty clear that the API is still not entirely stable. Given that, I would just go with the incompatible change rather than suck up a lot of your development time building and supporting bridges and facades and potentially introducing new bugs as a result. As an alternative, you could just support two independent implementations using the two namespaces for some period of time until people can switch to the new one. It's not like it will be that difficult for customer's to port their code. But really this is up to the Scala maintainers to decide what they want to do. On 3/13/18, 12:01 PM, "kellen sunderland" wrote: Maintaining backwards compatibility never results in the prettiest code, but it seems pretty desirable here. There are relatively few files here, so I agree there's some risk but I don't think it would take too much time. Feel free to suggest alternatives Christopher. On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:56 PM, Barber, Christopher < christopher.bar...@analog.com> wrote: > That sounds like a lot of work and it would be easy to get wrong if it is > even feasible. > > On 3/13/18, 11:51 AM, "kellen sunderland" > wrote: > > I don't know about aliasing a namespace in Scala, but I wonder how > hard it > would be to either (1) provide a fascade from the new package to the > old > package or (2) keep two copies of the scala code temporarily along > with two > copies of the JNI entry points. In both of these cases we could setup > @deprecated on all public calls to the old package. > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:47 PM, Nan Zhu > wrote: > > > re Chris: I do not have any good idea about this. > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Chris Olivier < > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala > > > in order to maintain backwards compatibility? > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier < > cjolivie...@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > not sure I understand. How could changing a java namespace > > (effectively > > > > > moving the files to a different location as well as changing > the > > > package > > > > > names) be backward-compatible? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:02 PM Steffen Rochel < > > > steffenroc...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I suggest the vote should call out if the change is breaking > > backward > > > > > > compatibility or not. > > > > > > I looked through the scala name changing thread and don't see > > > > > justification > > > > > > for a backward incompatible change. > > > > > > I do agree it would be good to change the name space, but > have not > > > > seen a > > > > > > reason why the change has to be made now in backward > incompatible > > > way. > > > > > > Non-binding vote: > > > > > > +1 for backward compatible namespace change > > > > > > -1 for backward incompatible namespace change > > > > > > > > > > > > Suggest to explore package aliasing for a backward compatible > > change > > > - > > > > > see > > > > > > a possible idea at > > > > > > > > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28238520/python- > > > > > like-package-name-aliasing-in-scala > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steffen > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Rahul Huilgol < > > > rahulhuil...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We need to change the namespace as soon as possible. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Roshani Nagmote < > > > > > > > roshaninagmo...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 to change the namespace > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The assumption is that it would be changed more-or-less > > > > > immediately. > > > > > > > ie. > > > > > > > > > this is like a voted PR, I guess. > > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache
How many people do we estimate are currently using the Scala interface? Probably the actual blast radius should be considered. If it is very small, then we can probably have more "wiggle room", so to speak. On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:00 AM, Chernov, Anton wrote: > I see (2) being the appropriate way to go. Scala code is copied to a new > namespace and all the old code gets a deprecation mark which means it's > only supported for backwards compatibility and will not be modified unless > there will be an urgent fix. > > On 13.03.18, 16:52, "kellen sunderland" > wrote: > > I don't know about aliasing a namespace in Scala, but I wonder how > hard it > would be to either (1) provide a fascade from the new package to the > old > package or (2) keep two copies of the scala code temporarily along > with two > copies of the JNI entry points. In both of these cases we could setup > @deprecated on all public calls to the old package. > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:47 PM, Nan Zhu > wrote: > > > re Chris: I do not have any good idea about this. > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Chris Olivier < > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala > > > in order to maintain backwards compatibility? > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier < > cjolivie...@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > not sure I understand. How could changing a java namespace > > (effectively > > > > > moving the files to a different location as well as changing > the > > > package > > > > > names) be backward-compatible? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:02 PM Steffen Rochel < > > > steffenroc...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I suggest the vote should call out if the change is breaking > > backward > > > > > > compatibility or not. > > > > > > I looked through the scala name changing thread and don't see > > > > > justification > > > > > > for a backward incompatible change. > > > > > > I do agree it would be good to change the name space, but > have not > > > > seen a > > > > > > reason why the change has to be made now in backward > incompatible > > > way. > > > > > > Non-binding vote: > > > > > > +1 for backward compatible namespace change > > > > > > -1 for backward incompatible namespace change > > > > > > > > > > > > Suggest to explore package aliasing for a backward compatible > > change > > > - > > > > > see > > > > > > a possible idea at > > > > > > > > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28238520/python- > > > > > like-package-name-aliasing-in-scala > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steffen > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Rahul Huilgol < > > > rahulhuil...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We need to change the namespace as soon as possible. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Roshani Nagmote < > > > > > > > roshaninagmo...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 to change the namespace > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The assumption is that it would be changed more-or-less > > > > > immediately. > > > > > > > ie. > > > > > > > > > this is like a voted PR, I guess. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is about changing the namespace. As far as I > know, the > > > > > version > > > > > > > > number > > > > > > > > > > of the next release is not defined. > > > > > > > > > > At such point where a release is announced, one could > > > comment, > > > > > vote > > > > > > > > > > whatever on the chosen version of that release, I > suppose. > > > But > > > > > > > that's > > > > > > > > > > beyond the scope of this vote, because the "next > release" > > is > > > > not > > > > > > yet > > > > > > > > > > defined. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Just for clarification: Is this vote about changing > the >
Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache
I'm not taking a side here, but just please consider that if you have two separate implementations for awhile, the newer one will start to diverge and over time, it will become harder and harder for the user to port his code. You may find yourself supporting the old code for much longer than you anticipated (especially if changed go into the old implementation). On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:11 AM, Barber, Christopher < christopher.bar...@analog.com> wrote: > Personally, I believe that MXNet jumped the gun on 1.0. It is pretty clear > that the API is still not entirely stable. > > Given that, I would just go with the incompatible change rather than suck > up a lot of your development time building and supporting bridges and > facades and potentially introducing new bugs as a result. As an > alternative, you could just support two independent implementations using > the two namespaces for some period of time until people can switch to the > new one. It's not like it will be that difficult for customer's to port > their code. > > But really this is up to the Scala maintainers to decide what they want to > do. > > On 3/13/18, 12:01 PM, "kellen sunderland" > wrote: > > Maintaining backwards compatibility never results in the prettiest > code, > but it seems pretty desirable here. There are relatively few files > here, > so I agree there's some risk but I don't think it would take too much > time. Feel free to suggest alternatives Christopher. > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:56 PM, Barber, Christopher < > christopher.bar...@analog.com> wrote: > > > That sounds like a lot of work and it would be easy to get wrong if > it is > > even feasible. > > > > On 3/13/18, 11:51 AM, "kellen sunderland" < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > I don't know about aliasing a namespace in Scala, but I wonder > how > > hard it > > would be to either (1) provide a fascade from the new package to > the > > old > > package or (2) keep two copies of the scala code temporarily > along > > with two > > copies of the JNI entry points. In both of these cases we could > setup > > @deprecated on all public calls to the old package. > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:47 PM, Nan Zhu > > > wrote: > > > > > re Chris: I do not have any good idea about this. > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Chris Olivier < > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala > > > > in order to maintain backwards compatibility? > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu < > zhunanmcg...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier < > > cjolivie...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > not sure I understand. How could changing a java > namespace > > > (effectively > > > > > > moving the files to a different location as well as > changing > > the > > > > package > > > > > > names) be backward-compatible? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:02 PM Steffen Rochel < > > > > steffenroc...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I suggest the vote should call out if the change is > breaking > > > backward > > > > > > > compatibility or not. > > > > > > > I looked through the scala name changing thread and > don't see > > > > > > justification > > > > > > > for a backward incompatible change. > > > > > > > I do agree it would be good to change the name space, > but > > have not > > > > > seen a > > > > > > > reason why the change has to be made now in backward > > incompatible > > > > way. > > > > > > > Non-binding vote: > > > > > > > +1 for backward compatible namespace change > > > > > > > -1 for backward incompatible namespace change > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suggest to explore package aliasing for a backward > compatible > > > change > > > > - > > > > > > see > > > > > > > a possible idea at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28238520/python- > > > > > > like-package-name-aliasing-in-scala > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steffen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Rahul Huilgol < > > > > rahulhuil...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > >
Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache
The namespace change is the first thing that's done for most projects that come to apache incubation How many production deployments of MXNet Scala API are out there --- 3 ? 2 ? 1.7643 ? I would think its barely a handful of them. Agree with Christopher Barber that MXNEt jumped the gun with 1.0 and its best now to suck up a breaking change. +1 binding On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 12:26 PM, Chris Olivier wrote: > I'm not taking a side here, but just please consider that if you have two > separate implementations for awhile, the newer one will start to diverge > and over time, it will become harder and harder for the user to port his > code. You may find yourself supporting the old code for much longer than > you anticipated (especially if changed go into the old implementation). > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:11 AM, Barber, Christopher < > christopher.bar...@analog.com> wrote: > > > Personally, I believe that MXNet jumped the gun on 1.0. It is pretty > clear > > that the API is still not entirely stable. > > > > Given that, I would just go with the incompatible change rather than suck > > up a lot of your development time building and supporting bridges and > > facades and potentially introducing new bugs as a result. As an > > alternative, you could just support two independent implementations using > > the two namespaces for some period of time until people can switch to the > > new one. It's not like it will be that difficult for customer's to port > > their code. > > > > But really this is up to the Scala maintainers to decide what they want > to > > do. > > > > On 3/13/18, 12:01 PM, "kellen sunderland" > > wrote: > > > > Maintaining backwards compatibility never results in the prettiest > > code, > > but it seems pretty desirable here. There are relatively few files > > here, > > so I agree there's some risk but I don't think it would take too much > > time. Feel free to suggest alternatives Christopher. > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:56 PM, Barber, Christopher < > > christopher.bar...@analog.com> wrote: > > > > > That sounds like a lot of work and it would be easy to get wrong if > > it is > > > even feasible. > > > > > > On 3/13/18, 11:51 AM, "kellen sunderland" < > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > I don't know about aliasing a namespace in Scala, but I wonder > > how > > > hard it > > > would be to either (1) provide a fascade from the new package > to > > the > > > old > > > package or (2) keep two copies of the scala code temporarily > > along > > > with two > > > copies of the JNI entry points. In both of these cases we > could > > setup > > > @deprecated on all public calls to the old package. > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:47 PM, Nan Zhu < > zhunanmcg...@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > re Chris: I do not have any good idea about this. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Chris Olivier < > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala > > > > > in order to maintain backwards compatibility? > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu < > > zhunanmcg...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > not sure I understand. How could changing a java > > namespace > > > > (effectively > > > > > > > moving the files to a different location as well as > > changing > > > the > > > > > package > > > > > > > names) be backward-compatible? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:02 PM Steffen Rochel < > > > > > steffenroc...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I suggest the vote should call out if the change is > > breaking > > > > backward > > > > > > > > compatibility or not. > > > > > > > > I looked through the scala name changing thread and > > don't see > > > > > > > justification > > > > > > > > for a backward incompatible change. > > > > > > > > I do agree it would be good to change the name space, > > but > > > have not > > > > > > seen a > > > > > > > > reason why the change has to be made now in backward > > > incompatible > > > > > way. > > > > > > > > Non-binding vote: > > > > > > > > +1 for backward compatible namespace change > > > > > > > > -1 for backward incompatible namespace
Re: [VOTE] Change Scala namespace from dmlc to org.apache
If you were to have two implementations you would want to annotate the old one as deprecated immediately. I don't think you would want to commit to supporting it for more than a couple of months. How many users of the Scala MXNet interface are there in any case? And do they really view the Scala API as a mature stable product? Sometimes it is better to bite the bullet and force people to switch. Think how much time has been wasted on python 2.7/3.x compatibility years after 2.7 should have been long forgotten. On 3/13/18, 12:26 PM, "Chris Olivier" wrote: I'm not taking a side here, but just please consider that if you have two separate implementations for awhile, the newer one will start to diverge and over time, it will become harder and harder for the user to port his code. You may find yourself supporting the old code for much longer than you anticipated (especially if changed go into the old implementation). On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:11 AM, Barber, Christopher < christopher.bar...@analog.com> wrote: > Personally, I believe that MXNet jumped the gun on 1.0. It is pretty clear > that the API is still not entirely stable. > > Given that, I would just go with the incompatible change rather than suck > up a lot of your development time building and supporting bridges and > facades and potentially introducing new bugs as a result. As an > alternative, you could just support two independent implementations using > the two namespaces for some period of time until people can switch to the > new one. It's not like it will be that difficult for customer's to port > their code. > > But really this is up to the Scala maintainers to decide what they want to > do. > > On 3/13/18, 12:01 PM, "kellen sunderland" > wrote: > > Maintaining backwards compatibility never results in the prettiest > code, > but it seems pretty desirable here. There are relatively few files > here, > so I agree there's some risk but I don't think it would take too much > time. Feel free to suggest alternatives Christopher. > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:56 PM, Barber, Christopher < > christopher.bar...@analog.com> wrote: > > > That sounds like a lot of work and it would be easy to get wrong if > it is > > even feasible. > > > > On 3/13/18, 11:51 AM, "kellen sunderland" < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > I don't know about aliasing a namespace in Scala, but I wonder > how > > hard it > > would be to either (1) provide a fascade from the new package to > the > > old > > package or (2) keep two copies of the scala code temporarily > along > > with two > > copies of the JNI entry points. In both of these cases we could > setup > > @deprecated on all public calls to the old package. > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:47 PM, Nan Zhu > > > wrote: > > > > > re Chris: I do not have any good idea about this. > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Chris Olivier < > > cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala > > > > in order to maintain backwards compatibility? > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu < > zhunanmcg...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier < > > cjolivie...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > not sure I understand. How could changing a java > namespace > > > (effectively > > > > > > moving the files to a different location as well as > changing > > the > > > > package > > > > > > names) be backward-compatible? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:02 PM Steffen Rochel < > > > > steffenroc...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I suggest the vote should call out if the change is > breaking > > > backward > > > > > > > compatibility or not. > > > > > > > I looked through the scala name changing thread and > don't see > > > > > > justification > > > > > > > for a backward incompatible change. > > > > > > > I do agree it would be good to change the name space, > but >