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 15:54:10 GMT
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 9:37 AM, <dlmarion@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >
> > From: "Keith Turner" <keith@deenlo.com>
> > To: "Accumulo Dev List" <dev@accumulo.apache.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2014 10:31:53 AM
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] API release policy for 1.7/2.0
> >
> > 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).
> > >
> >
> > -1 For the reason I stated earlier. I think we are setting ourselves to
> > waste time in the future debating this by not making a more firm decision
> > now about which deprecated methods will be dropped. In the earlier email
> I
> > listed two options, are there other options?
> >
>
>
>
> > It seems that we already had this discussion[1] and a conclusion[2]. No
> > vote though.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/accumulo-dev/201410.mbox/%3CCAL5zq9ah+G+oMqR_p5E09Cwyue0K2ztVoJ10h+GriKOvhe+ggQ@mail.gmail.com%3E
> > [2]
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/accumulo-dev/201410.mbox/%3CCAL5zq9aaiCCO%2B%2BtwkKzNzw_xpjTQtPj%3DV%3DrEFUDR-eKoSAHBuQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> >
> >
> That discussion did a good job of coming to consensus on not remove any
> deprecated methods earlier than 2.0.
>
> I believe Keith's concern is that he'd like to specify what is and is not
> getting dropped at 2.0. The original proposal only says that things added
> in 1.7+ won't be dropped earlier than 3.0. It leaves the fate of things
> deprecated prior to 1.7 ambiguous in the 2.0 release.
>
> Did I correctly restate your concern Keith?
>

Yes


>
> --
> Sean
>

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