-1 Prohibit
пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 20:54, Denis Magda :
> [-1 Prohibit]
>
> -
> Denis
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 12:02 AM Alexey Goncharuk
> wrote:
>
> > Dear Apache Ignite community,
> >
> > We would like to conduct a formal vote on the subject of whether to allow
> > or prohibit a joint exi
[-1 Prohibit]
-
Denis
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 12:02 AM Alexey Goncharuk
wrote:
> Dear Apache Ignite community,
>
> We would like to conduct a formal vote on the subject of whether to allow
> or prohibit a joint existence of @deprecated annotation for an old API
> and @IgniteExperimental [1] fo
Hello Mahesh,
Welcome to the community! It's a pleasure to get you interested in the
contribution.
Just in case, copying some useful pages for getting started:
- Ignite contribution process and a collection of tickets for newcomers:
https://ignite.apache.org/community/contribute.html
-
Hello Erel,
Thanks for introducing yourself and welcome to the community! Hope Ignite
will work out for your solutions, and the community will benefit by having
you as a member. Don't hesitate to reach out for architectural discussions
or if you come across any uncertainties.
Most likely, you've
Vyacheslav Koptilin created IGNITE-12656:
Summary: Cleanup GridCacheProcessor from functionality not related
to its responsibility
Key: IGNITE-12656
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12656
I've pushed a commit intended to fix the test [1]
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12655
пт, 31 янв. 2020 г. в 11:50, Alexei Scherbakov :
> IgnitePdsDestroyCacheTest* failures are related to test misconfiguration.
>
> I'll fix it soon.
>
> пт, 31 янв. 2020 г. в 02:56, :
>
>> Hi I
Alexey Scherbakov created IGNITE-12655:
--
Summary: Remove setting explicit page size in
IgnitePdsDestroyCacheAbstractTest
Key: IGNITE-12655
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12655
Vyacheslav Koptilin created IGNITE-12654:
Summary: Some of rentingFutures in GridDhtPartitionTopologyImpl
may accumulate a huge number of eviction callbacks
Key: IGNITE-12654
URL: https://issues.apache.org
-1 Prohibit
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 5:30 PM Alexey Kuznetsov
wrote:
> -1 Prohibit
>
> From my point of view, we should not deprecate the old API if the new API
> is marked as experemental.
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 4:47 PM Konstantin Orlov
> wrote:
>
> > -1 Prohibit
> >
> > We should not de
Anton Kalashnikov created IGNITE-12653:
--
Summary: Add example of baseline auto-adjust feature
Key: IGNITE-12653
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12653
Project: Ignite
Is
Anton Kalashnikov created IGNITE-12652:
--
Summary: Add example of failure handling
Key: IGNITE-12652
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12652
Project: Ignite
Issue Type: Ta
-1 Prohibit
>From my point of view, we should not deprecate the old API if the new API
is marked as experemental.
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 4:47 PM Konstantin Orlov
wrote:
> -1 Prohibit
>
> We should not deprecate the old API if the new API could change in the
> near future.
>
>
--
Alexey Kuzn
-1 Prohibit
We should not deprecate the old API if the new API could change in the near
future.
Hello Lev,
Thanks for working on this!
Please move the ticket to a Patch Available state so that reviewers can
spot the ticket in filters. Also, make sure to get a MTCGA Bot visa as per
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+Teamcity+Bot#ApacheIgniteTeamcityBot-Howtochec
+1
I think we are talking about huge API reorganization, not a simple renaming [1].
[1]
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/technotes/guides/javadoc/deprecation/deprecation.html
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 at 16:32, Ilya Kasnacheev wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> +1 because it is possible that old API is obvio
Saikat,
Yes, I think we can go ahead with the modules PRs as long as reviewers are
ok with the changes. Given that there is an activity around the spring
module, which modules do you think will get to the first release?
сб, 1 февр. 2020 г. в 21:37, Saikat Maitra :
> Hi Alexey,
>
> Please let me
Hello!
+1 because it is possible that old API is obviously going away some time in
the future, such as if it is inherently unsafe.
I don't see why we should not indicate this fact as soon as it is known.
Experimental API can implement partial or complete fix but not be
stabilized yet. In fact, i
Hello everyone, I've finished task [IGNITE-10698] and made PR
Jira issue link:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10698?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20AND%20labels%20in%20(newbie)%20and%20status%20%3D%20OPEN
PR github link: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7394
It will be cool if so
Ivan,
Seem the answer is "yes, we've got consensus".
The issue [1] created.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12650
On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 at 21:33, Ivan Pavlukhin wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> Do we have a consensus so far that MVCC should be annotated with
> @IgniteExperimental? Are ther
Vyacheslav Koptilin created IGNITE-12651:
Summary: Non-comparable keys for eviction policy cause failure
handle and node shutdown
Key: IGNITE-12651
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12651
Maxim Muzafarov created IGNITE-12650:
Summary: Mark MVCC with @IgniteExperimental annotation
Key: IGNITE-12650
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12650
Project: Ignite
Issu
Thank you so you much! Will wait:)
пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 15:13, Alexey Goncharuk :
> Got it, then no need to rush, let's wait for the TF-IGFS decoupling.
>
> пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 13:15, Alexey Zinoviev :
>
> > Tensorflow integration uses IGFS, if you have any idea how to store files
> > in mem
-1 because it's controversial to deprecation rules [1]
[1]
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/technotes/guides/javadoc/deprecation/deprecation.html
пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 14:03, Вячеслав Коптилин :
> -1 Prohibit
>
> We should not deprecate old API unless the new one will be released as a
>
Got it, then no need to rush, let's wait for the TF-IGFS decoupling.
пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 13:15, Alexey Zinoviev :
> Tensorflow integration uses IGFS, if you have any idea how to store files
> in memory by another way, please suggest something.
> I hope to decouple Ignite-TF integration to the
Vyacheslav Koptilin created IGNITE-12649:
Summary: HibernateL2CacheExample throws IllegalArgumentException
for ignite-hibernate_5.3
Key: IGNITE-12649
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12649
Hi! take a look to
https://github.com/hawkore/examples-apache-ignite-extensions/ they are
implemented a solution for persisted lucene and spatial indexes
--
Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
-1 Prohibit
We should not deprecate old API unless the new one will be released as a
stable version.
Thanks,
S.
пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 13:19, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
dmitriy.govoruk...@gmail.com>:
> -1 Prohibit
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 12:58 PM Pavel Tupitsyn
> wrote:
>
> > -1 Prohibit
> >
>
Hi, folks.
Another question has raised. Can I remove / rename / bring substitution for
IgniteMXBean#active(boolean active) ? Or at least to deprecate?
The problem is that it interferes with Ignite#active(boolean active). Same
signature for different interfaces. And only one implementation:
Ignite
Ryabov Dmitrii created IGNITE-12648:
---
Summary: Add user attributes to non-Java thin clients
Key: IGNITE-12648
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12648
Project: Ignite
Issue T
-1 Prohibit
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 12:58 PM Pavel Tupitsyn
wrote:
> -1 Prohibit
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 12:41 PM Zhenya Stanilovsky
> wrote:
>
> >
> > -1, sounds confusing, i wan`t use deprecated API
> > and @IgniteExperimental it`s something unknown with undefined «time for
> > support».
Tensorflow integration uses IGFS, if you have any idea how to store files
in memory by another way, please suggest something.
I hope to decouple Ignite-TF integration to the separate repository before
release 2.9 with its own file system over Ignite Caches
пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 12:49, Ivan Pavluk
-1 Prohibit
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 12:41 PM Zhenya Stanilovsky
wrote:
>
> -1, sounds confusing, i wan`t use deprecated API
> and @IgniteExperimental it`s something unknown with undefined «time for
> support».
>
>
>
> >Dear Apache Ignite community,
> >
> >We would like to conduct a formal vote o
Is not it blocked by
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10292 as stated in JIRA?
@Alex Zinoviev could you please shed some light on this?
Best regards,
Ivan Pavlukhin
пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 12:46, Anton Kalashnikov :
>
> I found the correct ticket for such activity -
> https://issues
I found the correct ticket for such activity -
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942
--
Best regards,
Anton Kalashnikov
10.02.2020, 12:16, "Anton Kalashnikov" :
> Hello.
>
> I created a ticket for this activity -
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12647. And if we are
-1 Prohibit
because otherwise, instead of one stable API we'll have the old(not recommend
to use) and unstable one. Which is not user-friendly.
--
Best regards,
Anton Kalashnikov
10.02.2020, 12:28, "Ivan Rakov" :
> -1 Prohibit
>
> From my point of view, deprecation of the existing API will c
-1, sounds confusing, i wan`t use deprecated API and @IgniteExperimental it`s
something unknown with undefined «time for support».
>Dear Apache Ignite community,
>
>We would like to conduct a formal vote on the subject of whether to allow
>or prohibit a joint existence of @deprecated annotati
Please, have a look another ticket related to the igfs, for example
tensorflow via search.
Agree that this is an abandoned part of ignite
пн, 10 февр. 2020 г., 12:12 Anton Kalashnikov (Jira) :
> Anton Kalashnikov created IGNITE-12647:
> --
>
>
-1 Prohibit
>From my point of view, deprecation of the existing API will confuse users
in case API suggested as a replacement is marked with @IgniteExperimental.
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 12:20 PM Nikolay Izhikov
wrote:
> +1
>
> > 10 февр. 2020 г., в 11:57, Andrey Mashenkov
> написал(а):
> >
> >
-1 Prohibit because there is a non-zero chance that the new API will
never be stabilized.
--
Kind Regards
Roman Kondakov
On 10.02.2020 11:13, Vyacheslav Daradur wrote:
> +1 Allow, because once the community has made a decision to introduce
> new APIs instead of an old one - stabilization is ju
+1
> 10 февр. 2020 г., в 11:57, Andrey Mashenkov
> написал(а):
>
> -1 Prohibit.
>
> We must not deprecate old API without have a new stable well-documented
> alternative and a way to migrate to new one.
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 11:02 AM Alexey Goncharuk
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Apache Ignit
Hello.
I created a ticket for this activity -
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12647. And if we are still in
consensus I'll do it at the nearest time(I've already had the prepared code).
--
Best regards,
Anton Kalashnikov
10.02.2020, 12:07, "Alexey Goncharuk" :
> Folks,
>
> I th
Anton Kalashnikov created IGNITE-12647:
--
Summary: Get rid of IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator
Key: IGNITE-12647
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12647
Project: Ignite
Issue T
Folks,
I think there is a consensus here, but we did not remove IGFS neither in
2.7 nor in 2.8, did we? Should we schedule a corresponding ticket for 2.9?
-1 Prohibit.
We must not deprecate old API without have a new stable well-documented
alternative and a way to migrate to new one.
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 11:02 AM Alexey Goncharuk
wrote:
> Dear Apache Ignite community,
>
> We would like to conduct a formal vote on the subject of whether to all
-1 Prohibit.
@deprecated annotation normally means that the method or class or whatever is
not recommended to use, since a new proper implementation is available, and
people should use it instead.
But with @IgniteExperimental this is not the case.
Denis
On 10/02/2020, 11:45, "Юрий" wrote:
-1 Prohibit
It looks inconsistent to me deprecate one API without present new stable
API as replacement.
пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 11:02, Alexey Goncharuk :
> Dear Apache Ignite community,
>
> We would like to conduct a formal vote on the subject of whether to allow
> or prohibit a joint existence
-1 Prohibit as PMC, I'd like new annotation, but suggest to play with them
for the next 1-2 releases
пн, 10 февр. 2020 г., 11:30 ткаленко кирилл :
> +1
>
> 10.02.2020, 11:02, "Alexey Goncharuk" :
> > Dear Apache Ignite community,
> >
> > We would like to conduct a formal vote on the subject of wh
+1
10.02.2020, 11:02, "Alexey Goncharuk" :
> Dear Apache Ignite community,
>
> We would like to conduct a formal vote on the subject of whether to allow
> or prohibit a joint existence of @deprecated annotation for an old API
> and @IgniteExperimental [1] for a new (replacement) API. The result of
*[-1 Prohibit]* Because it looks silly when old API is deprecated and new
API is experimental and it can confuse users and developers. New API can be
stabilized before the deprecation of old API.
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 11:02 AM Alexey Goncharuk
wrote:
> Dear Apache Ignite community,
>
> We woul
-1 Prohibit
1. As a library user I will stuck. Generally I do not want to use
either experimental or deprecated APIs in my production code. I will
not be able to upgrade.
2. We do not manage development resources in the Community. There
cannot be a reliable guarantee that any experimental API will
-1 Prohibit, We can't deprecate old API while a new API isn't stable.
пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 11:14, Vyacheslav Daradur :
> +1 Allow, because once the community has made a decision to introduce
> new APIs instead of an old one - stabilization is just a matter of
> time.
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at
+1 Allow, because once the community has made a decision to introduce
new APIs instead of an old one - stabilization is just a matter of
time.
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 11:02 AM Alexey Goncharuk wrote:
>
> Dear Apache Ignite community,
>
> We would like to conduct a formal vote on the subject of wh
Dear Apache Ignite community,
We would like to conduct a formal vote on the subject of whether to allow
or prohibit a joint existence of @deprecated annotation for an old API
and @IgniteExperimental [1] for a new (replacement) API. The result of this
vote will be formalized as an Apache Ignite dev
53 matches
Mail list logo
