ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Experimental features - thin client protocol as a first candidate
Date Wed, 13 Sep 2017 19:12:01 GMT

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.


On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <vozerov@gridgain.com>

> 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.

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