I'm a bit confused about my own issue there. What I did was: I looked through all the build files for anything shaded and filed a ticket to produce a vendored version. But Joda time is a key part of our API surface, so it can't actually be shaded. I think I will actually close that ticket as Invalid. If we later find a place where there was a different use that was shaded we can file a new ticket or re-open.
Kenn On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 9:19 AM David Morávek <david.mora...@gmail.com> wrote: > If there are no objections from dev@, I'll try to proceed with an upgrade > to the latest version <https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6895> > (2.10.1). > > Kenn, I've found your issue > <https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-5827> for joda-time vendoring, > is it still relevant? This might cause a breaking change as it is part of > user facing API. > > D. > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 5:44 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> wrote: > >> +dev@ >> >> I don't know of any special reason we are using an old version. >> >> Kenn >> >> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019, 09:38 Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Does anyone have any context on why we have such an old version of >>> Joda time (2.4 released on 2014!) and if there is any possible issue >>> upgrading it? If not maybe we can try to upgrade it.. >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 5:35 PM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > Mmmm interesting issue. There is also a plan to use a vendored version >>> > of joda-time not sure on the progress on that one. >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-5827 >>> > >>> > For Beam 3 that's the idea but so far there is not at ETA for Beam 3. >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-5530 >>> > >>> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 4:15 PM rahul patwari >>> > <rahulpatwari8...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > Hi David, >>> > > >>> > > The only incompatibility we have come across is this: >>> > > We have some timestamp format conversions in our project, where we >>> are converting from a timestamp format to another. >>> > > >>> > > With joda-time 2.4: >>> > > If we convert "2019-03-15 13:56:12" which is in "yyyy-MM-dd >>> HH:mm:ss" format, to "hh:mm:ss yy-MMM-dd z" format, the converted value is >>> "01:56:12 19-Mar-15 -07:00". >>> > > >>> > > Whereas with joda-time 2.9.3: >>> > > If we convert "2019-03-15 13:56:12" which is in "yyyy-MM-dd >>> HH:mm:ss" format, to "hh:mm:ss yy-MMM-dd z" format, the converted value is >>> "01:56:12 19-Mar-15 PDT". >>> > > >>> > > The javadoc for both the versions doesn't seem different though, for >>> 'z' DateTimeFormat. >>> > > >>> > > Even though the javadoc says - Zone names: Time zone names ('z') >>> cannot be parsed for both the versions, we are able to parse it in >>> joda-time 2.9.3. >>> > > >>> > > Also, joda-time will be replaced with java time with Beam 3? >>> > > >>> > > Thanks, >>> > > Rahul >>> > > >>> > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 5:37 PM David Morávek < >>> david.mora...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >> >>> > >> Hello Rahul, are there any incompatibilities you are running into >>> with spark version? These versions should be backward compatible. >>> > >> >>> > >> For jodatime doc: >>> > >> The main public API will remain backwards compatible for both >>> source and binary in the 2.x stream. >>> > >> >>> > >> This means you should be able to safely use Spark's version. >>> > >> >>> > >> D. >>> > >> >>> > >> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 5:45 AM rahul patwari < >>> rahulpatwari8...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> >>> > >>> Hi Ismael, >>> > >>> >>> > >>> We are using Beam with Spark Runner and Spark 2.4 has joda-time >>> 2.9.3 as a dependency. So, we have used joda-time 2.9.3 in our shaded >>> artifact set. As Beam has joda-time 2.4 as a dependency, I was wondering >>> whether it would break anything in Beam. >>> > >>> >>> > >>> Will joda-time be replaced with java time in Beam 3? What is the >>> expected release date of Beam 3? >>> > >>> >>> > >>> Thanks, >>> > >>> Rahul >>> > >>> >>> > >>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 7:23 PM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> Hello, >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> The long term goal would be to get rid of joda-time but that won't >>> > >>>> happen until Beam 3. >>> > >>>> Any 'particular' reason or motivation to push the upgrade? >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> Regards, >>> > >>>> Ismaël >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 11:53 AM rahul patwari >>> > >>>> <rahulpatwari8...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>>> > >>> > >>>> > Hi, >>> > >>>> > >>> > >>>> > Is there a plan to upgrade the dependency version of joda-time >>> to 2.9.3 or latest version? >>> > >>>> > >>> > >>>> > >>> > >>>> > Thanks, >>> > >>>> > Rahul >>> >>
