You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@apex.apache.org by Ashish Tadose <as...@gmail.com> on 2016/04/12 17:15:30 UTC
Remove redundant StorageAgent interface from Malhar library
Hi Team,
I have created a Task to Remove redundant StorageAgent interface from Malhar library - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXMALHAR-2051 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXMALHAR-2051>
Description -
For Malhar feature [APEXMALHAR-1938|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXMALHAR-1938] needed a change in StorageAgent interface which was not released when that feature was contributed so we had added copy of StorageAgent interface in Malhar-Library.
https://github.com/apache/incubator-apex-malhar/blob/master/library/src/main/java/com/datatorrent/lib/util/StorageAgent.java
Since those changes are released as part of Apex Core 3.3.0 release we no longer require redundant StorageAgent interface present in Malhar-library.
Also need to update AbstractKeyValueStorageAgent to implement StorageAgent from Apex-core than one present in Malhar-library for concrete implementation of StorageAgents to work.
It’s a small change so I would send a pull request for review soon.
Do let me know your views on this.
Thx,
Ashish
Re: Remove redundant StorageAgent interface from Malhar library
Posted by Thomas Weise <th...@datatorrent.com>.
No issue, it was added since last release.
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Sandesh Hegde <sa...@datatorrent.com>
wrote:
> What does semantic versioning says about removing interfaces in minor
> release?
>
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 8:15 AM Ashish Tadose <as...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Team,
> >
> > I have created a Task to Remove redundant StorageAgent interface from
> > Malhar library - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXMALHAR-2051 <
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXMALHAR-2051>
> >
> > Description -
> >
> > For Malhar feature [APEXMALHAR-1938|
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXMALHAR-1938] needed a change
> > in StorageAgent interface which was not released when that feature was
> > contributed so we had added copy of StorageAgent interface in
> > Malhar-Library.
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-apex-malhar/blob/master/library/src/main/java/com/datatorrent/lib/util/StorageAgent.java
> >
> > Since those changes are released as part of Apex Core 3.3.0 release we no
> > longer require redundant StorageAgent interface present in
> Malhar-library.
> >
> > Also need to update AbstractKeyValueStorageAgent to implement
> StorageAgent
> > from Apex-core than one present in Malhar-library for concrete
> > implementation of StorageAgents to work.
> >
> > It’s a small change so I would send a pull request for review soon.
> >
> > Do let me know your views on this.
> >
> > Thx,
> > Ashish
>
Re: Remove redundant StorageAgent interface from Malhar library
Posted by Sandesh Hegde <sa...@datatorrent.com>.
What does semantic versioning says about removing interfaces in minor
release?
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 8:15 AM Ashish Tadose <as...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Team,
>
> I have created a Task to Remove redundant StorageAgent interface from
> Malhar library - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXMALHAR-2051 <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXMALHAR-2051>
>
> Description -
>
> For Malhar feature [APEXMALHAR-1938|
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXMALHAR-1938] needed a change
> in StorageAgent interface which was not released when that feature was
> contributed so we had added copy of StorageAgent interface in
> Malhar-Library.
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-apex-malhar/blob/master/library/src/main/java/com/datatorrent/lib/util/StorageAgent.java
>
> Since those changes are released as part of Apex Core 3.3.0 release we no
> longer require redundant StorageAgent interface present in Malhar-library.
>
> Also need to update AbstractKeyValueStorageAgent to implement StorageAgent
> from Apex-core than one present in Malhar-library for concrete
> implementation of StorageAgents to work.
>
> It’s a small change so I would send a pull request for review soon.
>
> Do let me know your views on this.
>
> Thx,
> Ashish