hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Note breaking change on RegionObserver in hbase-2.0.0 (HBASE-15296 nice cleanup/refactor)
Date Fri, 15 Apr 2016 00:02:28 GMT
+1 to what Stephen said. 

> On Apr 14, 2016, at 3:37 PM, Stephen Jiang <syuanjiangdev@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> In the past, both HBASE-11425 and HBASE013645 used deprecation model,
> HBASE-15296 now uses replacement model.
> 
> Even we don't guarantee the compatibility of upgrading to 2.0.  the
> replacement model would make the upgrade more challenge and I am sure
> enterprise customer would stay in 1.x line longer.
> 
> My 2-cent is unless it is necessary (eg. no way to maintain it), we should
> try hard to make upgrade easier and use the deprecation model.
> 
> Thanks
> Stephen
> 
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Great idea.
>> 
>>> On Apr 14, 2016, at 12:35 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> We could also set up a job to run through the compat checking script
>>> we have against Public and LimitedPrivate API nightly.
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>> I think a major version increment is when we've allowed ourselves
>> leeway to
>>>> make breaking changes. If we were to do this though I'd like to see us
>> roll
>>>> in as many as we can at once.
>>>> 
>>>> By the way, we are still sometimes breaking CPs without meaning to. I
>> think
>>>> we messed up the RpcScheduler LimitedPrivate interface in 1.2 with
>>>> HBASE-15146, which added a return type to RpcScheduler#dispatch, and
>> breaks
>>>> Phoenix. Would you lot be interested in setting up a Jenkins job that
>> uses
>>>> Phoenix to watch for accidental breakage? It's not comprehensive of
>> course
>>>> but might be the closest available thing to it.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> We cool w/ this?
>>>>> 
>>>>> (I know we keep saying it over and over again that its fine to break
>> CPs
>>>>> w/o deprecation but still uneasy doing the actual breakage.... hence
>> the
>>>>> note here.)
>>>>> 
>>>>> St.Ack
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> 
>>>>  - Andy
>>>> 
>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>>>> (via Tom White)
>> 

Mime
View raw message