accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com>
Subject Re: compatibility check between 1.5.x and 1.6.0?
Date Wed, 23 Apr 2014 16:28:40 GMT
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com> wrote:

> The default japi configurations were set to ignore the mock package.
>


Oh, thats not good.   I probably did that, but I do not remember why.


>
>
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Keith Turner <keith@deenlo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Okay, I think all of these incompatibilities are things that should not
> > > have been in the public API in the first place.
> > >
> > > * client.admin.SecurityOperationsImpl
> > > * client.admin.TableOperationsImpl
> > > * client.admin.InstanceOparationsImpl
> > > * client.mock.MockShell
> > > * client.mock.MockTabletLocator
> > >
> > > These changes are due to refactorings outside of the public API leaking
> > > into classes within the client that handle implementation. For these
> > > things, I think we should fix them to not be in the public API and just
> > > include an apology in the release notes.
> > >
> >
> >
> > +1
> >
> > I remember seeing the .*Impl classes and ignoring them because they were
> > Impl, but I shouldn't have because they are not in an impl package.   I
> > don't remember seeing anything about mock, I must have glossed over that.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Any objections before I make a ticket and put up a patch? Do we need a
> > vote
> > > about breaking the API, or is calling out that we're going to do that
> in
> > > the RC vote sufficient?
> > >
> > > (the other findings appear to be the japi compliance checker not
> > > recognizing a method moving up a class hierarchy)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Here's the current reports, built with japi-compliance-checker 1.3.6
> > > >
> > > > http://people.apache.org/~busbey/compat_reports/accumulo/
> > > >
> > > > executed with:
> > > >
> > > > for version in 1.5.0 1.5.1 1.5.2; do japi-compliance-checker
> > > > -skip-deprecated -old japi-accumulo-${version}.xml -new
> > > > japi-accumulo-1.6.xml -l accumulo; done
> > > >
> > > > with the config xmls like what's in the repo, but set to look in my
> > maven
> > > > repo and to not skip mock.
> > > >
> > > > I'll triage the 1.5.0 changes tomorrow
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Eric Newton <eric.newton@gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I believe Keith did a mechanical/manual analysis and brought back
a
> > > couple
> > > >> of methods/classes.
> > > >>
> > > >> -Eric
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Has anyone done a compatibility check for the public API between
> > 1.5.x
> > > >> and
> > > >> > 1.6.0?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > While looking into ACCUMULO-2722 I noticed some changes that
might
> > be
> > > >> > problematic in client.mock and was wondering if anyone did a
> larger
> > > >> sweep
> > > >> > already.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >> > Sean
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Sean
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sean
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Sean
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message