accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] API release policy for 1.7/2.0
Date Wed, 03 Dec 2014 21:22:10 GMT
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Keith Turner <keith@deenlo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Following the conversation on the [VOTE] thread for ACCUMULO-3176, it
> > seems
> > > we require an explicit API guidelines at least for 1.7.0 and later
> until
> > > 2.0.0.
> > >
> > > I hereby propose we adopt the following guidelines for future releases
> > (if
> > > we produce any such releases) until 2.0.0:
> > >
> > > API additions are permitted in "major" 1.x releases (1.7, 1.8, 1.9,
> 1.10,
> > > etc.).
> > > API should be forwards and backwards compatible within a 1.x release
> (no
> > > new additions to the API in a "bugfix" release; e.g. 1.7.1).
> > > New API in 1.7.0 and later 1.x releases will not be removed in 2.0
> > (though
> > > they may be deprecated in 2.0 and subject to removal in 3.0).
> > > Existing API in 1.7.0 will be preserved through 2.0, and should only be
> > > subject to removal if it was already deprecated prior to 1.7.0 (though
> > they
> > > may be deprecated in 2.0 and subject to removal in 3.0).
> > >
> >
> > This stmt can lead to disagreement later over what deprecated methods are
> > removed in 2.0.  We could explicitly list which deprecated methods will
> be
> > removed as part of this vote.  Alternatively, we could add a clause
> saying
> > there will be a vote prior to 2.0 over which methods are removed.  If we
> > decide now, then we could add something to 1.7.0 javadoc stating the
> method
> > will go away in 2.0.
> >
> >
> These are intended to be minimal guidelines, not a comprehensive list of
> what should be removed... only guidelines to ensure we don't remove
> something in a breaking way. I'm fine with disagreeing with what can be
> removed later... so long as we're agreed on certain minimal things which
> cannot be removed, to ensure a smooth transition.
>
> However, for the record, the comprehensive list of things I expect to
> remove in 2.0, all of which were deprecated in 1.6.0 or prior:
>
> Constants.NO_AUTHS (deprecated since 1.6.0)
> ScannerOptions.{set,get}TimeOut(...) (deprecated since 1.5.0)
> Connector.create[MultiTable]Batch{Deleter,Scanner}(...) without
> BatchWriterConfig (deprecated since 1.5.0)
>

I think we should carry create[MultiTable]Batch{Deleter,Writer} w/o
BatchWriterConfig forward as deprecated in 2.0.0.  There is very little
maintenance cost on our end and any code written against 1.4 that wrote
data would have used these methods.



> Instance.getConnector(...) that doesn't take an AuthorizationToken
> (deprecated since 1.5.0)
> MutationsRejectedException constructor (deprecated since 1.6.0)
> MutationsRejectedException.getAuthorizationFailures() (deprecated since
> 1.5.0)
> some ZooKeeperInstance constructors replaced with ClientConfiguration
> (deprecated since 1.6.0)
> some SecurityOperations methods (deprecated since 1.5.0)
> TableOperations.getSplits() (deprecated since 1.5.0)
> non-range TableOperations.flush() (deprecated since 1.4)
> Constraint.getAuthorizations() (deprecated since 1.5.0)
> static KeyExtent.getkeyExtentsForRange() (deprecated and unused utility
> method)
> Value constructor with copy param (deprecated and unused)
> Aggregators (deprecated since 1.4)
> protected Accumulo{Input,Output}Format.getToken[Class]() (deprecated since
> 1.6.0)
> protected AccumuloInputFormat.getTabletLocator() (deprecated since 1.6.0)
> protected AccumuloInputFormat.setupIterators() (deprecated since 1.5.0)
> RangeInputSplit (deprecated since 1.5.2)
>
> Additionally, I was going to remove the non-public API trace module
> deprecated since 1.7 as part of the switch to HTrace.
>
> I've actually already done this on my local 2.0 branch I'm working in, but
> I have no intentions to remove anything else... and these guidelines would
> effectively prevent me from doing so.
>
> I would be opposed to adding javadocs stating methods will go away in 2.0,
> unless they are already deprecated. The fact is... 2.0 is not available,
> and we don't know exactly what will go away. But, we can establish
> guidelines to give us an idea of what will not go away. That's the purpose
> of the above guidelines.
>
>
> > I have been playing around w/ the following command to see whats
> currently
> > deprecated in master.
> >
> > find core/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/core/client/ -name "*.java" |
> > grep -i -v impl | xargs grep Deprecated -C 3
> >
> >
> > > The purpose of these guidelines are to ensure the ability to add
> > additional
> > > functionality and evolve API naturally, while minimizing API
> disruptions
> > to
> > > the user base, in the interim before 2.0.0 when we can formally adopt
> an
> > > API/versioning policy.
> > >
> > > Exceptions to these guidelines should be subject to a majority vote,
> on a
> > > case-by-case basis.
> > >
> > > Because these relate to release planning, this vote will be subject to
> > > majority vote, in accordance with our bylaws pertaining to release
> > planning
> > > and voting, and will be open for 3 days, concluding at 2000 on 5 Dec
> 2014
> > > UTC.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Christopher L Tubbs II
> > > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> > >
> >
>

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