You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@curator.apache.org by Cameron McKenzie <ca...@apache.org> on 2014/07/30 00:09:28 UTC
Fix for CURATOR-42
I've just committed a fix for CURATOR-42. Can someone give it a review
please?
cheers
Cam
Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
Posted by Eric Tschetter <ec...@gmail.com>.
Just for you Jordan, I signed up for Quora :P
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <
jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> http://www.quora.com/What-is-semantic-versioning
>
> Please, enlighten the world :)
>
> -Jordan
>
> From: Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>
> <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>
> Reply: Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>>
> <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>
> Date: July 29, 2014 at 7:17:43 PM
> To: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
> <de...@curator.apache.org>, Eric Tschetter <ec...@gmail.com>>
> <ec...@gmail.com>
>
> Cc: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>> <mc...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
>
> Actually, that helps a lot. It’s the best explanation I’ve read. Given
> that, it’s correct to move to 2.7.0 because of the CuratorFrameworkFactory
> change.
>
> It’s so good, you should post that somewhere. Quora maybe?
>
> -JZ
>
> From: Eric Tschetter <ec...@gmail.com> <ec...@gmail.com>
> Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
> <de...@curator.apache.org>
> Date: July 29, 2014 at 6:43:57 PM
> To: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
> <de...@curator.apache.org>
> Cc: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>> <mc...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
>
> Jordan, quick semantic versioning tutorial:
>
> If you have 1.0.0 and 1.0.1, you can use either one and you will not
> run into errors due to API conflicts (i.e. no ClassNotFound or
> NoSuchMethod type exceptions)
>
> If you have 1.0.0 and 1.1.0, you can replace 1.0.0 with 1.1.0 and you
> will not have errors due to API conflicts. If you try to swap 1.0.0
> in place of something that depends on 1.1.0, however, you *might* have
> errors due to API conflicts. I.e. you can go forward without errors,
> but not backwards
>
> If you have 1.0.0 and 2.0.0, you will likely have errors due to API
> conflicts if you replace either one with the other.
>
> Hope that helps, if not, feel free to completely ignore me :)
>
> --Eric
>
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Jordan Zimmerman
> <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> > Though, the api change is backward compatible. Frankly, semantic
> versioning confuses me most of the time.
> >
> > -JZ
> >
> > From: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>
> > Reply: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>>
> > Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:15:49 PM
> > To: Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>>
> > Cc: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
> > Subject: Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
> >
> > Ok, thanks. Also, have we decided against doing a 2.6.1? I noticed that
> this version is gone and only 2.7.0 is available.
> > cheers
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> > Next time just create a PR - I made one. Looks good to me.
> >
> > -JZ
> >
> > From: Cameron McKenzie <ca...@apache.org>
> > Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>,
> cammckenzie@apache.org <ca...@apache.org>>
> > Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:09:56 PM
> > To: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
> > Subject: Fix for CURATOR-42
> >
> > I've just committed a fix for CURATOR-42. Can someone give it a review
> > please?
> > cheers
> > Cam
> >
>
>
Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
Posted by Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>.
http://www.quora.com/What-is-semantic-versioning
Please, enlighten the world :)
-Jordan
From: Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>
Reply: Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>>
Date: July 29, 2014 at 7:17:43 PM
To: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>, Eric Tschetter <ec...@gmail.com>>
Cc: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>>
Subject: Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
Actually, that helps a lot. It’s the best explanation I’ve read. Given that, it’s correct to move to 2.7.0 because of the CuratorFrameworkFactory change.
It’s so good, you should post that somewhere. Quora maybe?
-JZ
From: Eric Tschetter <ec...@gmail.com>
Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
Date: July 29, 2014 at 6:43:57 PM
To: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
Cc: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>>
Subject: Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
Jordan, quick semantic versioning tutorial:
If you have 1.0.0 and 1.0.1, you can use either one and you will not
run into errors due to API conflicts (i.e. no ClassNotFound or
NoSuchMethod type exceptions)
If you have 1.0.0 and 1.1.0, you can replace 1.0.0 with 1.1.0 and you
will not have errors due to API conflicts. If you try to swap 1.0.0
in place of something that depends on 1.1.0, however, you *might* have
errors due to API conflicts. I.e. you can go forward without errors,
but not backwards
If you have 1.0.0 and 2.0.0, you will likely have errors due to API
conflicts if you replace either one with the other.
Hope that helps, if not, feel free to completely ignore me :)
--Eric
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Jordan Zimmerman
<jo...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> Though, the api change is backward compatible. Frankly, semantic versioning confuses me most of the time.
>
> -JZ
>
> From: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>
> Reply: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>>
> Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:15:49 PM
> To: Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>>
> Cc: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
> Subject: Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
>
> Ok, thanks. Also, have we decided against doing a 2.6.1? I noticed that this version is gone and only 2.7.0 is available.
> cheers
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> Next time just create a PR - I made one. Looks good to me.
>
> -JZ
>
> From: Cameron McKenzie <ca...@apache.org>
> Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>, cammckenzie@apache.org <ca...@apache.org>>
> Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:09:56 PM
> To: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
> Subject: Fix for CURATOR-42
>
> I've just committed a fix for CURATOR-42. Can someone give it a review
> please?
> cheers
> Cam
>
Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
Posted by Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>.
Actually, that helps a lot. It’s the best explanation I’ve read. Given that, it’s correct to move to 2.7.0 because of the CuratorFrameworkFactory change.
It’s so good, you should post that somewhere. Quora maybe?
-JZ
From: Eric Tschetter <ec...@gmail.com>
Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
Date: July 29, 2014 at 6:43:57 PM
To: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
Cc: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>>
Subject: Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
Jordan, quick semantic versioning tutorial:
If you have 1.0.0 and 1.0.1, you can use either one and you will not
run into errors due to API conflicts (i.e. no ClassNotFound or
NoSuchMethod type exceptions)
If you have 1.0.0 and 1.1.0, you can replace 1.0.0 with 1.1.0 and you
will not have errors due to API conflicts. If you try to swap 1.0.0
in place of something that depends on 1.1.0, however, you *might* have
errors due to API conflicts. I.e. you can go forward without errors,
but not backwards
If you have 1.0.0 and 2.0.0, you will likely have errors due to API
conflicts if you replace either one with the other.
Hope that helps, if not, feel free to completely ignore me :)
--Eric
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Jordan Zimmerman
<jo...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> Though, the api change is backward compatible. Frankly, semantic versioning confuses me most of the time.
>
> -JZ
>
> From: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>
> Reply: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>>
> Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:15:49 PM
> To: Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>>
> Cc: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
> Subject: Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
>
> Ok, thanks. Also, have we decided against doing a 2.6.1? I noticed that this version is gone and only 2.7.0 is available.
> cheers
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> Next time just create a PR - I made one. Looks good to me.
>
> -JZ
>
> From: Cameron McKenzie <ca...@apache.org>
> Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>, cammckenzie@apache.org <ca...@apache.org>>
> Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:09:56 PM
> To: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
> Subject: Fix for CURATOR-42
>
> I've just committed a fix for CURATOR-42. Can someone give it a review
> please?
> cheers
> Cam
>
Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
Posted by Eric Tschetter <ec...@gmail.com>.
Jordan, quick semantic versioning tutorial:
If you have 1.0.0 and 1.0.1, you can use either one and you will not
run into errors due to API conflicts (i.e. no ClassNotFound or
NoSuchMethod type exceptions)
If you have 1.0.0 and 1.1.0, you can replace 1.0.0 with 1.1.0 and you
will not have errors due to API conflicts. If you try to swap 1.0.0
in place of something that depends on 1.1.0, however, you *might* have
errors due to API conflicts. I.e. you can go forward without errors,
but not backwards
If you have 1.0.0 and 2.0.0, you will likely have errors due to API
conflicts if you replace either one with the other.
Hope that helps, if not, feel free to completely ignore me :)
--Eric
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Jordan Zimmerman
<jo...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> Though, the api change is backward compatible. Frankly, semantic versioning confuses me most of the time.
>
> -JZ
>
> From: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>
> Reply: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>>
> Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:15:49 PM
> To: Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>>
> Cc: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
> Subject: Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
>
> Ok, thanks. Also, have we decided against doing a 2.6.1? I noticed that this version is gone and only 2.7.0 is available.
> cheers
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> Next time just create a PR - I made one. Looks good to me.
>
> -JZ
>
> From: Cameron McKenzie <ca...@apache.org>
> Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>, cammckenzie@apache.org <ca...@apache.org>>
> Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:09:56 PM
> To: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
> Subject: Fix for CURATOR-42
>
> I've just committed a fix for CURATOR-42. Can someone give it a review
> please?
> cheers
> Cam
>
Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
Posted by Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>.
Though, the api change is backward compatible. Frankly, semantic versioning confuses me most of the time.
-JZ
From: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>
Reply: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>>
Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:15:49 PM
To: Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>>
Cc: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
Subject: Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
Ok, thanks. Also, have we decided against doing a 2.6.1? I noticed that this version is gone and only 2.7.0 is available.
cheers
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
Next time just create a PR - I made one. Looks good to me.
-JZ
From: Cameron McKenzie <ca...@apache.org>
Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>, cammckenzie@apache.org <ca...@apache.org>>
Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:09:56 PM
To: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
Subject: Fix for CURATOR-42
I've just committed a fix for CURATOR-42. Can someone give it a review
please?
cheers
Cam
Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
Posted by Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>.
Yeah - I changed 2.6.1 to 2.7.0 because it has a kind of API change.
-JZ
From: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>
Reply: Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>>
Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:15:49 PM
To: Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>>
Cc: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
Subject: Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
Ok, thanks. Also, have we decided against doing a 2.6.1? I noticed that this version is gone and only 2.7.0 is available.
cheers
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
Next time just create a PR - I made one. Looks good to me.
-JZ
From: Cameron McKenzie <ca...@apache.org>
Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>, cammckenzie@apache.org <ca...@apache.org>>
Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:09:56 PM
To: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
Subject: Fix for CURATOR-42
I've just committed a fix for CURATOR-42. Can someone give it a review
please?
cheers
Cam
Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
Posted by Cameron McKenzie <mc...@gmail.com>.
Ok, thanks. Also, have we decided against doing a 2.6.1? I noticed that
this version is gone and only 2.7.0 is available.
cheers
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> Next time just create a PR - I made one. Looks good to me.
>
> -JZ
>
> From: Cameron McKenzie <ca...@apache.org> <ca...@apache.org>
> Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
> <de...@curator.apache.org>, cammckenzie@apache.org <ca...@apache.org>>
> <ca...@apache.org>
> Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:09:56 PM
> To: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
> <de...@curator.apache.org>
> Subject: Fix for CURATOR-42
>
> I've just committed a fix for CURATOR-42. Can someone give it a review
> please?
> cheers
> Cam
>
>
Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
Posted by Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>.
Next time just create a PR - I made one. Looks good to me.
-JZ
From: Cameron McKenzie <ca...@apache.org>
Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>, cammckenzie@apache.org <ca...@apache.org>>
Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:09:56 PM
To: dev@curator.apache.org <de...@curator.apache.org>>
Subject: Fix for CURATOR-42
I've just committed a fix for CURATOR-42. Can someone give it a review
please?
cheers
Cam