hadoop-yarn-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Wang <andrew.w...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Assume Private-Unstable for classes that are not annotated
Date Tue, 22 Jul 2014 23:54:20 GMT
+1


On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Sandy Ryza <sandy.ryza@cloudera.com> wrote:

> That policy makes sense to me.  We should still label things @Private of
> course so that it can be reflected in the documentation.
>
> -Sandy
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Karthik Kambatla <kasha@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi devs
> >
> > As you might have noticed, we have several classes and methods in them
> that
> > are not annotated at all. This is seldom intentional. Avoiding
> incompatible
> > changes to all these classes can be considerable baggage.
> >
> > I was wondering if we should add an explicit disclaimer in our
> > compatibility guide that says, "Classes without annotations are to
> > considered @Private"
> >
> > For methods, is it reasonable to say - "Class members without specific
> > annotations inherit the annotations of the class"?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Karthik
> >
>

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