ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Experimental features - thin client protocol as a first candidate
Date Wed, 13 Sep 2017 19:35:22 GMT
In first version the protocol version can be “0.1”, 0.2”, etc. Once we are sure the protocol
is mature enough it can be stamped with version 1.0. 

The point is that the versions like 0.x imply that the protocol is not 100% final which is
pretty similar but not that loud as the experimental label.

> On Sep 13, 2017, at 12:12 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrakyan@apache.org> wrote:
> Vladimir,
> As far as the client, I don't think we need to call it experimental. An
> "experimental" feature sounds like it might explode if you come close :)
> How about we have client protocol versions instead? Then each Ignite
> release can announce which protocol versions it is compatible with.
> D.
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <vozerov@gridgain.com>
> wrote:
>> Igniters,
>> I would propose to add a concept of "experimental feature". Quite often we
>> face a situation when newly created feature has not-so-good API, or tested
>> insufficiently, etc.. Many vendors employ a concept of so-called
>> "experimental" features to mitigate the risks. Examples I am aware of:
>> Hadoop, Kotlin.
>> When feature is marked as experimental, there is no guarantees for API and
>> binary compatibility, neither it implies that the feature is bug-free. On
>> the other hand, users might start using the feature right away and provide
>> valuable feedback.
>> Let's add such concept to our product, and it would make it much better!
>> First candidate for this marker is our newly developed thin client. We put
>> a lot efforts to make it extensible in future, but I doubt it is possible
>> to take in count everything at once. Instead, I would rather release it as
>> "experimantel" in the scope of 2.3, and then finalize it as a part of 2.4
>> based on user's feedback.
>> What do you think?
>> Vladimir.

View raw message