zookeeper-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jordan Zimmerman <jor...@jordanzimmerman.com>
Subject Re: reconfig APIs
Date Wed, 07 Dec 2016 17:24:07 GMT
I read through the issue and disagree about the decision to move the APIs out. That was a stylistic
choice that breaks client code. I realize that 3.5.x has been advertised as an alpha but you
must realize that most of the world is using it in production. These APIs have now been published.
This will create a real headache for Curator which is why I’ve created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2642
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2642> - I hope we can move these APIs
back into ZooKeeper.java. 

-Jordan

> On Dec 7, 2016, at 5:54 PM, Patrick Hunt <phunt@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> It's discussed in more depth in the JIRA iirc, but basically;
> ZooKeeper.java provides client APIs, reconfig is an admiistrative API.
> 
> Patrick
> 
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com
>> wrote:
> 
>> I understand the need to make the methods require proper auth but there's
>> no reason to move it to a different class that I can see. Am I missing
>> something?
>> 
>> ====================
>> Jordan Zimmerman
>> 
>>> On Dec 7, 2016, at 4:37 PM, Patrick Hunt <phunt@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> This problem has been a long standing blocker issue for 3.5 and
>> identified
>>> early on as something that would need to change. This has been one of the
>>> reasons why 3.5 has stayed in alpha - because we allow non-backward
>>> compatible changes to new APIs in alpha and we knew we would have to fix
>>> this. The description/comments of ZOOKEEPER-2014 does a good job
>>> documenting why this had to change.
>>> 
>>> Patrick
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 3:18 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com
>>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> OK - I found the offending issue: ZOOKEEPER-2014
>>>> 
>>>> What is the benefit/logic of moving the reconfig() variants into a new
>>>> class? I can see if this was done from the start but you have now broken
>>>> Curator in a fairly serious non-backward compatible way for a minor
>>>> documenting benefit. Does anyone object to me reversing this?
>>>> 
>>>> -Jordan
>>>> 
>>>>> On Dec 7, 2016, at 11:37 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>>>> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I was compiling Curator against the ZK master and noticed that the
>>>> reconfig APIs are gone/changed. Can anyone point me at the issues for
>> this
>>>> and/or the discussion why this breaking change was made?
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Jordan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 


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