You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@pig.apache.org by Jonathan Coveney <jc...@gmail.com> on 2012/10/30 21:36:33 UTC
Are people ok with putting PIG-3017 into pig 11?
We have some scripts internally that have come up that are blocked on this,
and I can imagine as other shops continue to heavily use Pig, they may as
well. It seems like an easy, non-invasive change and I already did the
work, but technically we've already branched. I consider it a bug fix,
though, since it can be a show stopper for a data scientist.
Thoughts?
Jon
Re: Are people ok with putting PIG-3017 into pig 11?
Posted by Russell Jurney <ru...@gmail.com>.
I'll be the +1 :)
Russell Jurney http://datasyndrome.com
On Oct 30, 2012, at 2:27 PM, Jon Coveney <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Awesome. Next step is a code review :)
>
> On Oct 30, 2012, at 2:16 PM, Cheolsoo Park <ch...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Rohini Palaniswamy <rohini.aditya@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1. Agree with Julien. Error on hitting Configuration's size limit is a
>>> bug.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Julien Le Dem <ju...@twitter.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> To me in falls in the category of bug fixes we can add to an existing
>>>> version.
>>>> It is not adding any feature, it is fixing a bug/issue
>>>> It is well understood and limited to a specific area of the code.
>>>> Julien
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Jonathan Coveney <jc...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> We have some scripts internally that have come up that are blocked on
>>>> this,
>>>>> and I can imagine as other shops continue to heavily use Pig, they may
>>> as
>>>>> well. It seems like an easy, non-invasive change and I already did the
>>>>> work, but technically we've already branched. I consider it a bug fix,
>>>>> though, since it can be a show stopper for a data scientist.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>> Jon
>>>>
>>>
Re: Are people ok with putting PIG-3017 into pig 11?
Posted by Jon Coveney <jc...@gmail.com>.
Awesome. Next step is a code review :)
On Oct 30, 2012, at 2:16 PM, Cheolsoo Park <ch...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Rohini Palaniswamy <rohini.aditya@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>
>> +1. Agree with Julien. Error on hitting Configuration's size limit is a
>> bug.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Julien Le Dem <ju...@twitter.com> wrote:
>>
>>> To me in falls in the category of bug fixes we can add to an existing
>>> version.
>>> It is not adding any feature, it is fixing a bug/issue
>>> It is well understood and limited to a specific area of the code.
>>> Julien
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Jonathan Coveney <jc...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> We have some scripts internally that have come up that are blocked on
>>> this,
>>>> and I can imagine as other shops continue to heavily use Pig, they may
>> as
>>>> well. It seems like an easy, non-invasive change and I already did the
>>>> work, but technically we've already branched. I consider it a bug fix,
>>>> though, since it can be a show stopper for a data scientist.
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>> Jon
>>>
>>
Re: Are people ok with putting PIG-3017 into pig 11?
Posted by Cheolsoo Park <ch...@cloudera.com>.
+1
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Rohini Palaniswamy <rohini.aditya@gmail.com
> wrote:
> +1. Agree with Julien. Error on hitting Configuration's size limit is a
> bug.
>
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Julien Le Dem <ju...@twitter.com> wrote:
>
> > To me in falls in the category of bug fixes we can add to an existing
> > version.
> > It is not adding any feature, it is fixing a bug/issue
> > It is well understood and limited to a specific area of the code.
> > Julien
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Jonathan Coveney <jc...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > We have some scripts internally that have come up that are blocked on
> > this,
> > > and I can imagine as other shops continue to heavily use Pig, they may
> as
> > > well. It seems like an easy, non-invasive change and I already did the
> > > work, but technically we've already branched. I consider it a bug fix,
> > > though, since it can be a show stopper for a data scientist.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > > Jon
> >
>
Re: Are people ok with putting PIG-3017 into pig 11?
Posted by Rohini Palaniswamy <ro...@gmail.com>.
+1. Agree with Julien. Error on hitting Configuration's size limit is a
bug.
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Julien Le Dem <ju...@twitter.com> wrote:
> To me in falls in the category of bug fixes we can add to an existing
> version.
> It is not adding any feature, it is fixing a bug/issue
> It is well understood and limited to a specific area of the code.
> Julien
>
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Jonathan Coveney <jc...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > We have some scripts internally that have come up that are blocked on
> this,
> > and I can imagine as other shops continue to heavily use Pig, they may as
> > well. It seems like an easy, non-invasive change and I already did the
> > work, but technically we've already branched. I consider it a bug fix,
> > though, since it can be a show stopper for a data scientist.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> > Jon
>
Re: Are people ok with putting PIG-3017 into pig 11?
Posted by Julien Le Dem <ju...@twitter.com>.
To me in falls in the category of bug fixes we can add to an existing version.
It is not adding any feature, it is fixing a bug/issue
It is well understood and limited to a specific area of the code.
Julien
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Jonathan Coveney <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We have some scripts internally that have come up that are blocked on this,
> and I can imagine as other shops continue to heavily use Pig, they may as
> well. It seems like an easy, non-invasive change and I already did the
> work, but technically we've already branched. I consider it a bug fix,
> though, since it can be a show stopper for a data scientist.
>
> Thoughts?
> Jon