You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@spark.apache.org by Denny Lee <de...@gmail.com> on 2014/01/10 06:27:30 UTC
Re: graphx merge for scala 2.9
Quick follow up question here - what is the rough timeline for the GraphX
merge whether it is 0.8.x (hopefully) or 0.9.x?
On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Koert Kuipers <ko...@tresata.com> wrote:
> since we are still on scala 2.9.x and trunk migrated to 2.10.x i hope
> graphx will get merged into the 0.8.x series at some point, and not just
> 0.9.x (which is now scala 2.10), since that would make it hard for us to
> use in the near future.
> best, koert
>
Re: graphx merge for scala 2.9
Posted by Denny Lee <de...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Mark - my bad for not reviewing the pr. :-)
> On Jan 9, 2014, at 10:14 PM, Mark Hamstra <ma...@clearstorydata.com> wrote:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/367
>
>
>> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 9:27 PM, Denny Lee <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Quick follow up question here - what is the rough timeline for the GraphX merge whether it is 0.8.x (hopefully) or 0.9.x?
>>
>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Koert Kuipers <ko...@tresata.com> wrote:
>>> since we are still on scala 2.9.x and trunk migrated to 2.10.x i hope graphx will get merged into the 0.8.x series at some point, and not just 0.9.x (which is now scala 2.10), since that would make it hard for us to use in the near future.
>>> best, koert
>
Re: graphx merge for scala 2.9
Posted by Mark Hamstra <ma...@clearstorydata.com>.
https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/367
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 9:27 PM, Denny Lee <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Quick follow up question here - what is the rough timeline for the GraphX
> merge whether it is 0.8.x (hopefully) or 0.9.x?
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Koert Kuipers <ko...@tresata.com> wrote:
>
>> since we are still on scala 2.9.x and trunk migrated to 2.10.x i hope
>> graphx will get merged into the 0.8.x series at some point, and not just
>> 0.9.x (which is now scala 2.10), since that would make it hard for us to
>> use in the near future.
>> best, koert
>>
>
>