flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ufuk Celebi <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Changing Scala Version to 2.11.x
Date Tue, 26 Aug 2014 07:15:18 GMT
Nice to hear Aljoscha. :)

BTW Is there a issue for the stuff you are doing? I think it would be great
for future maintainers to have a small description of the problems you have
encountered thus far  ;-)


On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljoscha@apache.org>
wrote:

> Ok, I think we should stick with 2.10 then for the time being. I found
> another way to implement it and the Scala API will be very lean once I'm
> done, so it shouldn't be to hard to move to 2.11 once we have to.
>
> Aljoscha
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 9:18 PM, Sebastian Schelter <
> ssc.open@googlemail.com
> > wrote:
>
> > Going to 2.11 also restricts user to libraries that already have a 2.11
> > version available. Just my 2 cents.
> >
> > -sebastian
> > Am 24.08.2014 11:31 schrieb "Till Rohrmann" <trohrmann@apache.org>:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Sean Owen <srowen@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > My £0.02 -- yes it's an incompatible change, and I think you should
> > > > move to 2.11 sooner than later. It will get harder as time goes on
> and
> > > > eventually you'll have to maintain some 2.xx support after moving
> > > > ahead for some existing users. You have a load more latitude in
> > > > incubation. Move fast / break things -- for now.
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <
> > aljoscha@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > It would require users to move to 2.11 as well. So this might not
> be
> > > > such a
> > > > > good move right now, but that is why I'm asking here.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Aljoscha
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 9:40 PM, Sebastian Schelter <
> ssc@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> What does this mean from a user perspective? I'm not sure whether
> > most
> > > > >> companies are already moving to Scala 2.11. I know from one large
> > > > company
> > > > >> that is only conducting the move from 2.9 to 2.10 right now.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Best,
> > > > >> Sebastian
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On 08/23/2014 05:22 PM, Stephan Ewen wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> +1
> > > > >>>   Am 23.08.2014 17:16 schrieb "Aljoscha Krettek" <
> > > aljoscha@apache.org
> > > > >:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>  Hi,
> > > > >>>> what do you guys thing about bumping to 2.11.x. Scala
2.10.x
> has a
> > > > nasty
> > > > >>>> bug that has been biting me in the arse for years. Now
that I'm
> > > > trying to
> > > > >>>> bring the Scala API up to feature parity with the Java
API I'm
> > again
> > > > >>>> wrestling with the bug. (Something to do with type checking,
> which
> > > > keeps
> > > > >>>> me
> > > > >>>> from using an elegant solution using implicits. I can
elaborate
> if
> > > you
> > > > >>>> want.)
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> This would require some changes in the existing Scala
code but
> > they
> > > > >>>> should
> > > > >>>> be minor. Also, Scala is still a young and fast-moving
language,
> > so
> > > > >>>> people
> > > > >>>> should be used to bumping Scala versions often. By the
way,
> 2.11.0
> > > is
> > > > >>>> from
> > > > >>>> April 2014 and they had to minor releases since, so we
are up to
> > > > 2.11.2
> > > > >>>> now.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> What do you think?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Cheers,
> > > > >>>> Aljoscha
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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