[DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

[Sean Busbey <bu...@apache.org>]

Hi folks!

just a heads up that a few of us are planning to move a class out of
the public API without a deprecation cycle.

From the planned release note:

> The class LossyCounting was unintentionally marked Public but was never
> intended to be part of our public API. This oversight has been corrected
> and LossyCounting is now marked as Private and going forward may be
> subject to additional breaking changes or removal without notice. If you
> have taken a dependency on this class we recommend cloning it locally into
> your project before upgrading to this release.

This class was came in via HBASE-19722 and was published in HBase
1.4.6, 2.0.2, and 2.1.3 (and depending on RC timing might be in
2.2.0).

It will move to IA.Private as of 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 2.0.6, 2.1.5 and later
(maybe 2.2.1 depending on RC timing). The class already has
backwards-incompatible changes set to happen in upcoming releases
1.4.10, 1.5.0, and 2.2.0.

Please speak up sooner rather than later if you'll have a problem
voting on RCs that include this change, either here or on HBASE-21991.

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

[Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>]

> So we need to roll new RCs for both 2.1.5 and 2.2.0?
Yes, both RCs have missing commits and incomplete Release notes.

> The base patch didn't commit to branch-2.2?
The committer missed to push the change to branch-2.2 even though there was
a discussion HBASE-21991 should land there. Fix version also included 2.2.0
but not 2.1.5 where it was actually committed to.

On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 4:56 AM Guanghao Zhang <zg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The base patch didn't commit to branch-2.2? I found HBASE-21991 because it
> was a reopened issue and fix version was 2.2.0. Then I helped to commit the
> addendum to branch-2.2 and rolled 2.2.0RC4......
>
> 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2019年5月26日周日 上午10:39写道：
>
> > So we need to roll new RCs for both 2.1.5 and 2.2.0?
> >
> > Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>于2019年5月26日 周日05:46写道：
> >
> > > Apologies, I misinterpreted git log and JIRA previously. There is no
> need
> > > for a new issue to move the LossyCounting class to IA.Private.
> > >
> > > What is needed:
> > > branch-2.1: commit missing addendum and add 2.1.5 to fixed versions
> > > branch-2.2: commit missing base patch
> > >
> > > On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 10:30 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > We have decided this is not part of the public API so all that is
> > needed
> > > > is to change the annotation and post new RCs with that change with an
> > > > update to release notes. It doesn’t matter if there was an
> incompatible
> > > > change to the class made or not. A simple audience annotation mistake
> > is
> > > > taking disproportionate attention away from more important efforts.
> > > >
> > > > If an annotation change to one class is the only update in a new RC
> you
> > > > can have confidence in porting your votes from the last RC to the new
> > one
> > > > after confirming sums and signatures. For your consideration.
> > > >
> > > > > On May 25, 2019, at 12:37 PM, Peter Somogyi
> > > > <ps...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Unfortunately, that would require a new RC for 2.1.5 and I'm afraid
> > > > > Guanghao already started the process for 2.0.0.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 12:21 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > palomino219@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> A new issue can always solve the problem, I believe. I mean,
> revert
> > > the
> > > > >> addendum from branch-2.2-, and open a new issue, which just
> changes
> > > the
> > > > >> annotation for branch-2.2-, and commit the addendum again, with a
> > new
> > > > >> commit message.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>于2019年5月25日 周六16:42写道：
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> On the 2.1.5RC0 testing I noticed that the release notes do not
> > state
> > > > >> that
> > > > >>> LossyCounting was moved to IA.Private. This is tricky since the
> > > > original
> > > > >>> commit which introduced the incompatibility was not committed to
> > > > >>> branch-2.1, only the addendum which only modified the IA
> > annotation.
> > > > For
> > > > >>> 2.2.0 we have the same problem, however, 2.2.0 was added as fixed
> > > > version
> > > > >>> to HBASE-21991 even though only the addendum was committed to
> that
> > > > branch
> > > > >>> as well.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Do we have any best practices for such a case?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Thanks,
> > > > >>> Peter
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:57 PM Sakthi <
> sakthivel.azhaku@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> Looks good to me.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Sakthi
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:18 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > > palomino219@gmail.com>
> > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> +1.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年5月10日周五
> > > > >>> 下午9:08写道：
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Also +1 for making it IA.Private.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> > > > >>>>>> Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > > >>>>>> Date: Friday, May 10, 2019 at 1:41 PM
> > > > >>>>>> To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to
> > > > >>>> IA.Private
> > > > >>>>>> in all maintenance branches
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> +1 on moving LossyCounting to IA.Private
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:54 AM Stack <stack@duboce.net
> <mailto:
> > > > >>>>>> stack@duboce.net>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Looks good to me.
> > > > >>>>>> S
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 7:02 PM Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org
> > > > >>> <mailto:
> > > > >>>>>> busbey@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> Hi folks!
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> just a heads up that a few of us are planning to move a class
> > out
> > > > >>> of
> > > > >>>>>>> the public API without a deprecation cycle.
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> From the planned release note:
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> The class LossyCounting was unintentionally marked Public
> but
> > > > >> was
> > > > >>>>> never
> > > > >>>>>>>> intended to be part of our public API. This oversight has
> been
> > > > >>>>>> corrected
> > > > >>>>>>>> and LossyCounting is now marked as Private and going forward
> > > > >> may
> > > > >>> be
> > > > >>>>>>>> subject to additional breaking changes or removal without
> > > > >> notice.
> > > > >>>> If
> > > > >>>>>> you
> > > > >>>>>>>> have taken a dependency on this class we recommend cloning
> it
> > > > >>>> locally
> > > > >>>>>>> into
> > > > >>>>>>>> your project before upgrading to this release.
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> This class was came in via HBASE-19722 and was published in
> > HBase
> > > > >>>>>>> 1.4.6, 2.0.2, and 2.1.3 (and depending on RC timing might be
> in
> > > > >>>>>>> 2.2.0).
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> It will move to IA.Private as of 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 2.0.6, 2.1.5
> > and
> > > > >>>> later
> > > > >>>>>>> (maybe 2.2.1 depending on RC timing). The class already has
> > > > >>>>>>> backwards-incompatible changes set to happen in upcoming
> > releases
> > > > >>>>>>> 1.4.10, 1.5.0, and 2.2.0.
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> Please speak up sooner rather than later if you'll have a
> > problem
> > > > >>>>>>> voting on RCs that include this change, either here or on
> > > > >>>> HBASE-21991.
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

[Guanghao Zhang <zg...@gmail.com>]

The base patch didn't commit to branch-2.2? I found HBASE-21991 because it
was a reopened issue and fix version was 2.2.0. Then I helped to commit the
addendum to branch-2.2 and rolled 2.2.0RC4......

张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2019年5月26日周日 上午10:39写道：

> So we need to roll new RCs for both 2.1.5 and 2.2.0?
>
> Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>于2019年5月26日 周日05:46写道：
>
> > Apologies, I misinterpreted git log and JIRA previously. There is no need
> > for a new issue to move the LossyCounting class to IA.Private.
> >
> > What is needed:
> > branch-2.1: commit missing addendum and add 2.1.5 to fixed versions
> > branch-2.2: commit missing base patch
> >
> > On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 10:30 PM Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > We have decided this is not part of the public API so all that is
> needed
> > > is to change the annotation and post new RCs with that change with an
> > > update to release notes. It doesn’t matter if there was an incompatible
> > > change to the class made or not. A simple audience annotation mistake
> is
> > > taking disproportionate attention away from more important efforts.
> > >
> > > If an annotation change to one class is the only update in a new RC you
> > > can have confidence in porting your votes from the last RC to the new
> one
> > > after confirming sums and signatures. For your consideration.
> > >
> > > > On May 25, 2019, at 12:37 PM, Peter Somogyi
> > > <ps...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately, that would require a new RC for 2.1.5 and I'm afraid
> > > > Guanghao already started the process for 2.0.0.
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 12:21 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> palomino219@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> A new issue can always solve the problem, I believe. I mean, revert
> > the
> > > >> addendum from branch-2.2-, and open a new issue, which just changes
> > the
> > > >> annotation for branch-2.2-, and commit the addendum again, with a
> new
> > > >> commit message.
> > > >>
> > > >> Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>于2019年5月25日 周六16:42写道：
> > > >>
> > > >>> On the 2.1.5RC0 testing I noticed that the release notes do not
> state
> > > >> that
> > > >>> LossyCounting was moved to IA.Private. This is tricky since the
> > > original
> > > >>> commit which introduced the incompatibility was not committed to
> > > >>> branch-2.1, only the addendum which only modified the IA
> annotation.
> > > For
> > > >>> 2.2.0 we have the same problem, however, 2.2.0 was added as fixed
> > > version
> > > >>> to HBASE-21991 even though only the addendum was committed to that
> > > branch
> > > >>> as well.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Do we have any best practices for such a case?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thanks,
> > > >>> Peter
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:57 PM Sakthi <sakthivel.azhaku@gmail.com
> >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Looks good to me.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Sakthi
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:18 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > palomino219@gmail.com>
> > > >>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> +1.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年5月10日周五
> > > >>> 下午9:08写道：
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Also +1 for making it IA.Private.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> > > >>>>>> Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > >>>>>> Date: Friday, May 10, 2019 at 1:41 PM
> > > >>>>>> To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to
> > > >>>> IA.Private
> > > >>>>>> in all maintenance branches
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> +1 on moving LossyCounting to IA.Private
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:54 AM Stack <stack@duboce.net<mailto:
> > > >>>>>> stack@duboce.net>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Looks good to me.
> > > >>>>>> S
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 7:02 PM Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org
> > > >>> <mailto:
> > > >>>>>> busbey@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Hi folks!
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> just a heads up that a few of us are planning to move a class
> out
> > > >>> of
> > > >>>>>>> the public API without a deprecation cycle.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> From the planned release note:
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> The class LossyCounting was unintentionally marked Public but
> > > >> was
> > > >>>>> never
> > > >>>>>>>> intended to be part of our public API. This oversight has been
> > > >>>>>> corrected
> > > >>>>>>>> and LossyCounting is now marked as Private and going forward
> > > >> may
> > > >>> be
> > > >>>>>>>> subject to additional breaking changes or removal without
> > > >> notice.
> > > >>>> If
> > > >>>>>> you
> > > >>>>>>>> have taken a dependency on this class we recommend cloning it
> > > >>>> locally
> > > >>>>>>> into
> > > >>>>>>>> your project before upgrading to this release.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> This class was came in via HBASE-19722 and was published in
> HBase
> > > >>>>>>> 1.4.6, 2.0.2, and 2.1.3 (and depending on RC timing might be in
> > > >>>>>>> 2.2.0).
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> It will move to IA.Private as of 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 2.0.6, 2.1.5
> and
> > > >>>> later
> > > >>>>>>> (maybe 2.2.1 depending on RC timing). The class already has
> > > >>>>>>> backwards-incompatible changes set to happen in upcoming
> releases
> > > >>>>>>> 1.4.10, 1.5.0, and 2.2.0.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Please speak up sooner rather than later if you'll have a
> problem
> > > >>>>>>> voting on RCs that include this change, either here or on
> > > >>>> HBASE-21991.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

["张铎 (Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>]

So we need to roll new RCs for both 2.1.5 and 2.2.0?

Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>于2019年5月26日 周日05:46写道：

> Apologies, I misinterpreted git log and JIRA previously. There is no need
> for a new issue to move the LossyCounting class to IA.Private.
>
> What is needed:
> branch-2.1: commit missing addendum and add 2.1.5 to fixed versions
> branch-2.2: commit missing base patch
>
> On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 10:30 PM Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > We have decided this is not part of the public API so all that is needed
> > is to change the annotation and post new RCs with that change with an
> > update to release notes. It doesn’t matter if there was an incompatible
> > change to the class made or not. A simple audience annotation mistake is
> > taking disproportionate attention away from more important efforts.
> >
> > If an annotation change to one class is the only update in a new RC you
> > can have confidence in porting your votes from the last RC to the new one
> > after confirming sums and signatures. For your consideration.
> >
> > > On May 25, 2019, at 12:37 PM, Peter Somogyi
> > <ps...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, that would require a new RC for 2.1.5 and I'm afraid
> > > Guanghao already started the process for 2.0.0.
> > >
> > > On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 12:21 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> A new issue can always solve the problem, I believe. I mean, revert
> the
> > >> addendum from branch-2.2-, and open a new issue, which just changes
> the
> > >> annotation for branch-2.2-, and commit the addendum again, with a new
> > >> commit message.
> > >>
> > >> Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>于2019年5月25日 周六16:42写道：
> > >>
> > >>> On the 2.1.5RC0 testing I noticed that the release notes do not state
> > >> that
> > >>> LossyCounting was moved to IA.Private. This is tricky since the
> > original
> > >>> commit which introduced the incompatibility was not committed to
> > >>> branch-2.1, only the addendum which only modified the IA annotation.
> > For
> > >>> 2.2.0 we have the same problem, however, 2.2.0 was added as fixed
> > version
> > >>> to HBASE-21991 even though only the addendum was committed to that
> > branch
> > >>> as well.
> > >>>
> > >>> Do we have any best practices for such a case?
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> Peter
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:57 PM Sakthi <sa...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Looks good to me.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Sakthi
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:18 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> palomino219@gmail.com>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> +1.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年5月10日周五
> > >>> 下午9:08写道：
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Also +1 for making it IA.Private.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> > >>>>>> Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > >>>>>> Date: Friday, May 10, 2019 at 1:41 PM
> > >>>>>> To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to
> > >>>> IA.Private
> > >>>>>> in all maintenance branches
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> +1 on moving LossyCounting to IA.Private
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:54 AM Stack <stack@duboce.net<mailto:
> > >>>>>> stack@duboce.net>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Looks good to me.
> > >>>>>> S
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 7:02 PM Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org
> > >>> <mailto:
> > >>>>>> busbey@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Hi folks!
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> just a heads up that a few of us are planning to move a class out
> > >>> of
> > >>>>>>> the public API without a deprecation cycle.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> From the planned release note:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> The class LossyCounting was unintentionally marked Public but
> > >> was
> > >>>>> never
> > >>>>>>>> intended to be part of our public API. This oversight has been
> > >>>>>> corrected
> > >>>>>>>> and LossyCounting is now marked as Private and going forward
> > >> may
> > >>> be
> > >>>>>>>> subject to additional breaking changes or removal without
> > >> notice.
> > >>>> If
> > >>>>>> you
> > >>>>>>>> have taken a dependency on this class we recommend cloning it
> > >>>> locally
> > >>>>>>> into
> > >>>>>>>> your project before upgrading to this release.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> This class was came in via HBASE-19722 and was published in HBase
> > >>>>>>> 1.4.6, 2.0.2, and 2.1.3 (and depending on RC timing might be in
> > >>>>>>> 2.2.0).
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> It will move to IA.Private as of 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 2.0.6, 2.1.5 and
> > >>>> later
> > >>>>>>> (maybe 2.2.1 depending on RC timing). The class already has
> > >>>>>>> backwards-incompatible changes set to happen in upcoming releases
> > >>>>>>> 1.4.10, 1.5.0, and 2.2.0.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Please speak up sooner rather than later if you'll have a problem
> > >>>>>>> voting on RCs that include this change, either here or on
> > >>>> HBASE-21991.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

[Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>]

Apologies, I misinterpreted git log and JIRA previously. There is no need
for a new issue to move the LossyCounting class to IA.Private.

What is needed:
branch-2.1: commit missing addendum and add 2.1.5 to fixed versions
branch-2.2: commit missing base patch

On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 10:30 PM Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> We have decided this is not part of the public API so all that is needed
> is to change the annotation and post new RCs with that change with an
> update to release notes. It doesn’t matter if there was an incompatible
> change to the class made or not. A simple audience annotation mistake is
> taking disproportionate attention away from more important efforts.
>
> If an annotation change to one class is the only update in a new RC you
> can have confidence in porting your votes from the last RC to the new one
> after confirming sums and signatures. For your consideration.
>
> > On May 25, 2019, at 12:37 PM, Peter Somogyi
> <ps...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately, that would require a new RC for 2.1.5 and I'm afraid
> > Guanghao already started the process for 2.0.0.
> >
> > On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 12:21 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> A new issue can always solve the problem, I believe. I mean, revert the
> >> addendum from branch-2.2-, and open a new issue, which just changes the
> >> annotation for branch-2.2-, and commit the addendum again, with a new
> >> commit message.
> >>
> >> Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>于2019年5月25日 周六16:42写道：
> >>
> >>> On the 2.1.5RC0 testing I noticed that the release notes do not state
> >> that
> >>> LossyCounting was moved to IA.Private. This is tricky since the
> original
> >>> commit which introduced the incompatibility was not committed to
> >>> branch-2.1, only the addendum which only modified the IA annotation.
> For
> >>> 2.2.0 we have the same problem, however, 2.2.0 was added as fixed
> version
> >>> to HBASE-21991 even though only the addendum was committed to that
> branch
> >>> as well.
> >>>
> >>> Do we have any best practices for such a case?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Peter
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:57 PM Sakthi <sa...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Looks good to me.
> >>>>
> >>>> Sakthi
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:18 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年5月10日周五
> >>> 下午9:08写道：
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Also +1 for making it IA.Private.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> >>>>>> Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> >>>>>> Date: Friday, May 10, 2019 at 1:41 PM
> >>>>>> To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to
> >>>> IA.Private
> >>>>>> in all maintenance branches
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> +1 on moving LossyCounting to IA.Private
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:54 AM Stack <stack@duboce.net<mailto:
> >>>>>> stack@duboce.net>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Looks good to me.
> >>>>>> S
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 7:02 PM Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org
> >>> <mailto:
> >>>>>> busbey@apache.org>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi folks!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> just a heads up that a few of us are planning to move a class out
> >>> of
> >>>>>>> the public API without a deprecation cycle.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> From the planned release note:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The class LossyCounting was unintentionally marked Public but
> >> was
> >>>>> never
> >>>>>>>> intended to be part of our public API. This oversight has been
> >>>>>> corrected
> >>>>>>>> and LossyCounting is now marked as Private and going forward
> >> may
> >>> be
> >>>>>>>> subject to additional breaking changes or removal without
> >> notice.
> >>>> If
> >>>>>> you
> >>>>>>>> have taken a dependency on this class we recommend cloning it
> >>>> locally
> >>>>>>> into
> >>>>>>>> your project before upgrading to this release.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This class was came in via HBASE-19722 and was published in HBase
> >>>>>>> 1.4.6, 2.0.2, and 2.1.3 (and depending on RC timing might be in
> >>>>>>> 2.2.0).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It will move to IA.Private as of 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 2.0.6, 2.1.5 and
> >>>> later
> >>>>>>> (maybe 2.2.1 depending on RC timing). The class already has
> >>>>>>> backwards-incompatible changes set to happen in upcoming releases
> >>>>>>> 1.4.10, 1.5.0, and 2.2.0.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please speak up sooner rather than later if you'll have a problem
> >>>>>>> voting on RCs that include this change, either here or on
> >>>> HBASE-21991.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

[Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>]

We have decided this is not part of the public API so all that is needed is to change the annotation and post new RCs with that change with an update to release notes. It doesn’t matter if there was an incompatible change to the class made or not. A simple audience annotation mistake is taking disproportionate attention away from more important efforts. 

If an annotation change to one class is the only update in a new RC you can have confidence in porting your votes from the last RC to the new one after confirming sums and signatures. For your consideration. 

> On May 25, 2019, at 12:37 PM, Peter Somogyi <ps...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote:
> 
> Unfortunately, that would require a new RC for 2.1.5 and I'm afraid
> Guanghao already started the process for 2.0.0.
> 
> On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 12:21 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> A new issue can always solve the problem, I believe. I mean, revert the
>> addendum from branch-2.2-, and open a new issue, which just changes the
>> annotation for branch-2.2-, and commit the addendum again, with a new
>> commit message.
>> 
>> Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>于2019年5月25日 周六16:42写道：
>> 
>>> On the 2.1.5RC0 testing I noticed that the release notes do not state
>> that
>>> LossyCounting was moved to IA.Private. This is tricky since the original
>>> commit which introduced the incompatibility was not committed to
>>> branch-2.1, only the addendum which only modified the IA annotation. For
>>> 2.2.0 we have the same problem, however, 2.2.0 was added as fixed version
>>> to HBASE-21991 even though only the addendum was committed to that branch
>>> as well.
>>> 
>>> Do we have any best practices for such a case?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Peter
>>> 
>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:57 PM Sakthi <sa...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Looks good to me.
>>>> 
>>>> Sakthi
>>>> 
>>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:18 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> +1.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年5月10日周五
>>> 下午9:08写道：
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Also +1 for making it IA.Private.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
>>>>>> Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
>>>>>> Date: Friday, May 10, 2019 at 1:41 PM
>>>>>> To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to
>>>> IA.Private
>>>>>> in all maintenance branches
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> +1 on moving LossyCounting to IA.Private
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:54 AM Stack <stack@duboce.net<mailto:
>>>>>> stack@duboce.net>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Looks good to me.
>>>>>> S
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 7:02 PM Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org
>>> <mailto:
>>>>>> busbey@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi folks!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> just a heads up that a few of us are planning to move a class out
>>> of
>>>>>>> the public API without a deprecation cycle.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> From the planned release note:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The class LossyCounting was unintentionally marked Public but
>> was
>>>>> never
>>>>>>>> intended to be part of our public API. This oversight has been
>>>>>> corrected
>>>>>>>> and LossyCounting is now marked as Private and going forward
>> may
>>> be
>>>>>>>> subject to additional breaking changes or removal without
>> notice.
>>>> If
>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>> have taken a dependency on this class we recommend cloning it
>>>> locally
>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>>> your project before upgrading to this release.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This class was came in via HBASE-19722 and was published in HBase
>>>>>>> 1.4.6, 2.0.2, and 2.1.3 (and depending on RC timing might be in
>>>>>>> 2.2.0).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It will move to IA.Private as of 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 2.0.6, 2.1.5 and
>>>> later
>>>>>>> (maybe 2.2.1 depending on RC timing). The class already has
>>>>>>> backwards-incompatible changes set to happen in upcoming releases
>>>>>>> 1.4.10, 1.5.0, and 2.2.0.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please speak up sooner rather than later if you'll have a problem
>>>>>>> voting on RCs that include this change, either here or on
>>>> HBASE-21991.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

[Peter Somogyi <ps...@cloudera.com.INVALID>]

Unfortunately, that would require a new RC for 2.1.5 and I'm afraid
Guanghao already started the process for 2.0.0.

On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 12:21 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> A new issue can always solve the problem, I believe. I mean, revert the
> addendum from branch-2.2-, and open a new issue, which just changes the
> annotation for branch-2.2-, and commit the addendum again, with a new
> commit message.
>
> Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>于2019年5月25日 周六16:42写道：
>
> > On the 2.1.5RC0 testing I noticed that the release notes do not state
> that
> > LossyCounting was moved to IA.Private. This is tricky since the original
> > commit which introduced the incompatibility was not committed to
> > branch-2.1, only the addendum which only modified the IA annotation. For
> > 2.2.0 we have the same problem, however, 2.2.0 was added as fixed version
> > to HBASE-21991 even though only the addendum was committed to that branch
> > as well.
> >
> > Do we have any best practices for such a case?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Peter
> >
> > On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:57 PM Sakthi <sa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Looks good to me.
> > >
> > > Sakthi
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:18 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1.
> > > >
> > > > Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年5月10日周五
> > 下午9:08写道：
> > > >
> > > > > Also +1 for making it IA.Private.
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> > > > > Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > > > Date: Friday, May 10, 2019 at 1:41 PM
> > > > > To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to
> > > IA.Private
> > > > > in all maintenance branches
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 on moving LossyCounting to IA.Private
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:54 AM Stack <stack@duboce.net<mailto:
> > > > > stack@duboce.net>> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Looks good to me.
> > > > > S
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 7:02 PM Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org
> > <mailto:
> > > > > busbey@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi folks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > just a heads up that a few of us are planning to move a class out
> > of
> > > > > > the public API without a deprecation cycle.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From the planned release note:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > The class LossyCounting was unintentionally marked Public but
> was
> > > > never
> > > > > > > intended to be part of our public API. This oversight has been
> > > > > corrected
> > > > > > > and LossyCounting is now marked as Private and going forward
> may
> > be
> > > > > > > subject to additional breaking changes or removal without
> notice.
> > > If
> > > > > you
> > > > > > > have taken a dependency on this class we recommend cloning it
> > > locally
> > > > > > into
> > > > > > > your project before upgrading to this release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This class was came in via HBASE-19722 and was published in HBase
> > > > > > 1.4.6, 2.0.2, and 2.1.3 (and depending on RC timing might be in
> > > > > > 2.2.0).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It will move to IA.Private as of 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 2.0.6, 2.1.5 and
> > > later
> > > > > > (maybe 2.2.1 depending on RC timing). The class already has
> > > > > > backwards-incompatible changes set to happen in upcoming releases
> > > > > > 1.4.10, 1.5.0, and 2.2.0.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please speak up sooner rather than later if you'll have a problem
> > > > > > voting on RCs that include this change, either here or on
> > > HBASE-21991.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

["张铎 (Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>]

A new issue can always solve the problem, I believe. I mean, revert the
addendum from branch-2.2-, and open a new issue, which just changes the
annotation for branch-2.2-, and commit the addendum again, with a new
commit message.

Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>于2019年5月25日 周六16:42写道：

> On the 2.1.5RC0 testing I noticed that the release notes do not state that
> LossyCounting was moved to IA.Private. This is tricky since the original
> commit which introduced the incompatibility was not committed to
> branch-2.1, only the addendum which only modified the IA annotation. For
> 2.2.0 we have the same problem, however, 2.2.0 was added as fixed version
> to HBASE-21991 even though only the addendum was committed to that branch
> as well.
>
> Do we have any best practices for such a case?
>
> Thanks,
> Peter
>
> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:57 PM Sakthi <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Looks good to me.
> >
> > Sakthi
> >
> > On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:18 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1.
> > >
> > > Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年5月10日周五
> 下午9:08写道：
> > >
> > > > Also +1 for making it IA.Private.
> > > >
> > > > From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> > > > Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > > Date: Friday, May 10, 2019 at 1:41 PM
> > > > To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to
> > IA.Private
> > > > in all maintenance branches
> > > >
> > > > +1 on moving LossyCounting to IA.Private
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:54 AM Stack <stack@duboce.net<mailto:
> > > > stack@duboce.net>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Looks good to me.
> > > > S
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 7:02 PM Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org
> <mailto:
> > > > busbey@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi folks!
> > > > >
> > > > > just a heads up that a few of us are planning to move a class out
> of
> > > > > the public API without a deprecation cycle.
> > > > >
> > > > > From the planned release note:
> > > > >
> > > > > > The class LossyCounting was unintentionally marked Public but was
> > > never
> > > > > > intended to be part of our public API. This oversight has been
> > > > corrected
> > > > > > and LossyCounting is now marked as Private and going forward may
> be
> > > > > > subject to additional breaking changes or removal without notice.
> > If
> > > > you
> > > > > > have taken a dependency on this class we recommend cloning it
> > locally
> > > > > into
> > > > > > your project before upgrading to this release.
> > > > >
> > > > > This class was came in via HBASE-19722 and was published in HBase
> > > > > 1.4.6, 2.0.2, and 2.1.3 (and depending on RC timing might be in
> > > > > 2.2.0).
> > > > >
> > > > > It will move to IA.Private as of 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 2.0.6, 2.1.5 and
> > later
> > > > > (maybe 2.2.1 depending on RC timing). The class already has
> > > > > backwards-incompatible changes set to happen in upcoming releases
> > > > > 1.4.10, 1.5.0, and 2.2.0.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please speak up sooner rather than later if you'll have a problem
> > > > > voting on RCs that include this change, either here or on
> > HBASE-21991.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

[Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>]

On the 2.1.5RC0 testing I noticed that the release notes do not state that
LossyCounting was moved to IA.Private. This is tricky since the original
commit which introduced the incompatibility was not committed to
branch-2.1, only the addendum which only modified the IA annotation. For
2.2.0 we have the same problem, however, 2.2.0 was added as fixed version
to HBASE-21991 even though only the addendum was committed to that branch
as well.

Do we have any best practices for such a case?

Thanks,
Peter

On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:57 PM Sakthi <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Looks good to me.
>
> Sakthi
>
> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:18 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1.
> >
> > Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年5月10日周五 下午9:08写道：
> >
> > > Also +1 for making it IA.Private.
> > >
> > > From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> > > Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > Date: Friday, May 10, 2019 at 1:41 PM
> > > To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to
> IA.Private
> > > in all maintenance branches
> > >
> > > +1 on moving LossyCounting to IA.Private
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:54 AM Stack <stack@duboce.net<mailto:
> > > stack@duboce.net>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Looks good to me.
> > > S
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 7:02 PM Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org<mailto:
> > > busbey@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi folks!
> > > >
> > > > just a heads up that a few of us are planning to move a class out of
> > > > the public API without a deprecation cycle.
> > > >
> > > > From the planned release note:
> > > >
> > > > > The class LossyCounting was unintentionally marked Public but was
> > never
> > > > > intended to be part of our public API. This oversight has been
> > > corrected
> > > > > and LossyCounting is now marked as Private and going forward may be
> > > > > subject to additional breaking changes or removal without notice.
> If
> > > you
> > > > > have taken a dependency on this class we recommend cloning it
> locally
> > > > into
> > > > > your project before upgrading to this release.
> > > >
> > > > This class was came in via HBASE-19722 and was published in HBase
> > > > 1.4.6, 2.0.2, and 2.1.3 (and depending on RC timing might be in
> > > > 2.2.0).
> > > >
> > > > It will move to IA.Private as of 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 2.0.6, 2.1.5 and
> later
> > > > (maybe 2.2.1 depending on RC timing). The class already has
> > > > backwards-incompatible changes set to happen in upcoming releases
> > > > 1.4.10, 1.5.0, and 2.2.0.
> > > >
> > > > Please speak up sooner rather than later if you'll have a problem
> > > > voting on RCs that include this change, either here or on
> HBASE-21991.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

[Sakthi <sa...@gmail.com>]

Looks good to me.

Sakthi

On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:18 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1.
>
> Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年5月10日周五 下午9:08写道：
>
> > Also +1 for making it IA.Private.
> >
> > From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> > Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > Date: Friday, May 10, 2019 at 1:41 PM
> > To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private
> > in all maintenance branches
> >
> > +1 on moving LossyCounting to IA.Private
> >
> > On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:54 AM Stack <stack@duboce.net<mailto:
> > stack@duboce.net>> wrote:
> >
> > Looks good to me.
> > S
> >
> > On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 7:02 PM Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org<mailto:
> > busbey@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi folks!
> > >
> > > just a heads up that a few of us are planning to move a class out of
> > > the public API without a deprecation cycle.
> > >
> > > From the planned release note:
> > >
> > > > The class LossyCounting was unintentionally marked Public but was
> never
> > > > intended to be part of our public API. This oversight has been
> > corrected
> > > > and LossyCounting is now marked as Private and going forward may be
> > > > subject to additional breaking changes or removal without notice. If
> > you
> > > > have taken a dependency on this class we recommend cloning it locally
> > > into
> > > > your project before upgrading to this release.
> > >
> > > This class was came in via HBASE-19722 and was published in HBase
> > > 1.4.6, 2.0.2, and 2.1.3 (and depending on RC timing might be in
> > > 2.2.0).
> > >
> > > It will move to IA.Private as of 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 2.0.6, 2.1.5 and later
> > > (maybe 2.2.1 depending on RC timing). The class already has
> > > backwards-incompatible changes set to happen in upcoming releases
> > > 1.4.10, 1.5.0, and 2.2.0.
> > >
> > > Please speak up sooner rather than later if you'll have a problem
> > > voting on RCs that include this change, either here or on HBASE-21991.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

["张铎 (Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>]

+1.

Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年5月10日周五 下午9:08写道：

> Also +1 for making it IA.Private.
>
> From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> Date: Friday, May 10, 2019 at 1:41 PM
> To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private
> in all maintenance branches
>
> +1 on moving LossyCounting to IA.Private
>
> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:54 AM Stack <stack@duboce.net<mailto:
> stack@duboce.net>> wrote:
>
> Looks good to me.
> S
>
> On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 7:02 PM Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org<mailto:
> busbey@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> > Hi folks!
> >
> > just a heads up that a few of us are planning to move a class out of
> > the public API without a deprecation cycle.
> >
> > From the planned release note:
> >
> > > The class LossyCounting was unintentionally marked Public but was never
> > > intended to be part of our public API. This oversight has been
> corrected
> > > and LossyCounting is now marked as Private and going forward may be
> > > subject to additional breaking changes or removal without notice. If
> you
> > > have taken a dependency on this class we recommend cloning it locally
> > into
> > > your project before upgrading to this release.
> >
> > This class was came in via HBASE-19722 and was published in HBase
> > 1.4.6, 2.0.2, and 2.1.3 (and depending on RC timing might be in
> > 2.2.0).
> >
> > It will move to IA.Private as of 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 2.0.6, 2.1.5 and later
> > (maybe 2.2.1 depending on RC timing). The class already has
> > backwards-incompatible changes set to happen in upcoming releases
> > 1.4.10, 1.5.0, and 2.2.0.
> >
> > Please speak up sooner rather than later if you'll have a problem
> > voting on RCs that include this change, either here or on HBASE-21991.
> >
>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

[Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com>]

Also +1 for making it IA.Private.

From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
Date: Friday, May 10, 2019 at 1:41 PM
To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

+1 on moving LossyCounting to IA.Private

On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:54 AM Stack <st...@duboce.net>> wrote:

Looks good to me.
S

On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 7:02 PM Sean Busbey <bu...@apache.org>> wrote:

> Hi folks!
>
> just a heads up that a few of us are planning to move a class out of
> the public API without a deprecation cycle.
>
> From the planned release note:
>
> > The class LossyCounting was unintentionally marked Public but was never
> > intended to be part of our public API. This oversight has been
corrected
> > and LossyCounting is now marked as Private and going forward may be
> > subject to additional breaking changes or removal without notice. If
you
> > have taken a dependency on this class we recommend cloning it locally
> into
> > your project before upgrading to this release.
>
> This class was came in via HBASE-19722 and was published in HBase
> 1.4.6, 2.0.2, and 2.1.3 (and depending on RC timing might be in
> 2.2.0).
>
> It will move to IA.Private as of 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 2.0.6, 2.1.5 and later
> (maybe 2.2.1 depending on RC timing). The class already has
> backwards-incompatible changes set to happen in upcoming releases
> 1.4.10, 1.5.0, and 2.2.0.
>
> Please speak up sooner rather than later if you'll have a problem
> voting on RCs that include this change, either here or on HBASE-21991.
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

[Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>]

+1 on moving LossyCounting to IA.Private

On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:54 AM Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:

> Looks good to me.
> S
>
> On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 7:02 PM Sean Busbey <bu...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi folks!
> >
> > just a heads up that a few of us are planning to move a class out of
> > the public API without a deprecation cycle.
> >
> > From the planned release note:
> >
> > > The class LossyCounting was unintentionally marked Public but was never
> > > intended to be part of our public API. This oversight has been
> corrected
> > > and LossyCounting is now marked as Private and going forward may be
> > > subject to additional breaking changes or removal without notice. If
> you
> > > have taken a dependency on this class we recommend cloning it locally
> > into
> > > your project before upgrading to this release.
> >
> > This class was came in via HBASE-19722 and was published in HBase
> > 1.4.6, 2.0.2, and 2.1.3 (and depending on RC timing might be in
> > 2.2.0).
> >
> > It will move to IA.Private as of 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 2.0.6, 2.1.5 and later
> > (maybe 2.2.1 depending on RC timing). The class already has
> > backwards-incompatible changes set to happen in upcoming releases
> > 1.4.10, 1.5.0, and 2.2.0.
> >
> > Please speak up sooner rather than later if you'll have a problem
> > voting on RCs that include this change, either here or on HBASE-21991.
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving IA.Public class LossyCounting to IA.Private in all maintenance branches

[Stack <st...@duboce.net>]

Looks good to me.
S

On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 7:02 PM Sean Busbey <bu...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi folks!
>
> just a heads up that a few of us are planning to move a class out of
> the public API without a deprecation cycle.
>
> From the planned release note:
>
> > The class LossyCounting was unintentionally marked Public but was never
> > intended to be part of our public API. This oversight has been corrected
> > and LossyCounting is now marked as Private and going forward may be
> > subject to additional breaking changes or removal without notice. If you
> > have taken a dependency on this class we recommend cloning it locally
> into
> > your project before upgrading to this release.
>
> This class was came in via HBASE-19722 and was published in HBase
> 1.4.6, 2.0.2, and 2.1.3 (and depending on RC timing might be in
> 2.2.0).
>
> It will move to IA.Private as of 1.4.10, 1.5.0, 2.0.6, 2.1.5 and later
> (maybe 2.2.1 depending on RC timing). The class already has
> backwards-incompatible changes set to happen in upcoming releases
> 1.4.10, 1.5.0, and 2.2.0.
>
> Please speak up sooner rather than later if you'll have a problem
> voting on RCs that include this change, either here or on HBASE-21991.
>