You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@avro.apache.org by Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org> on 2012/11/28 23:58:42 UTC
release 1.7.3 soon?
I hope to create a 1.7.3 release candidate in the next few days.
Are there any changes folks want to get into this release?
Doug
Re: release 1.7.3 soon?
Posted by Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org>.
Sean,
Sure, please update it. I set the "fix version" to 1.8 earlier. Thanks!
Doug
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> AVRO-997 would be an incompatible change so we'd have to change the
>> release name to 1.8.0 and folks might then reasonably adopt it more
>> slowly, since it might break things. I'd prefer to wait until we have
>> other more substantial incompatible changes; to group them together in
>> a single incompatible release.
>>
>>
>
> Sure, that sounds reasonable. Mind if I update the ticket to reference this
> so that observers know that the strict approach is a go, and that we're
> just waiting to aggregate breakage? The ticket currently reads to me like
> it's an open topic.
>
>
> Also, I don't think of AVRO-997 as a bug but rather a lack of error
>> checking. The proposed change is to no longer permit folks to pass a
>> java.lang.Enum in generic data, but rather to force them to always use
>> GenericEnumSymbol, or switch to using specific or reflect, which allow
>> java.lang.Enum for enum symbols. So if this is causing you problems,
>> you can simply change your code to use GenericEnumSymbol now rather
>> than wait until 1.8.0 forces you to make that change.
>>
>> Am I missing something?
>>
>
> That's essentially correct.
>
> -Sean
Re: release 1.7.3 soon?
Posted by Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com>.
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org> wrote:
> AVRO-997 would be an incompatible change so we'd have to change the
> release name to 1.8.0 and folks might then reasonably adopt it more
> slowly, since it might break things. I'd prefer to wait until we have
> other more substantial incompatible changes; to group them together in
> a single incompatible release.
>
>
Sure, that sounds reasonable. Mind if I update the ticket to reference this
so that observers know that the strict approach is a go, and that we're
just waiting to aggregate breakage? The ticket currently reads to me like
it's an open topic.
Also, I don't think of AVRO-997 as a bug but rather a lack of error
> checking. The proposed change is to no longer permit folks to pass a
> java.lang.Enum in generic data, but rather to force them to always use
> GenericEnumSymbol, or switch to using specific or reflect, which allow
> java.lang.Enum for enum symbols. So if this is causing you problems,
> you can simply change your code to use GenericEnumSymbol now rather
> than wait until 1.8.0 forces you to make that change.
>
> Am I missing something?
>
That's essentially correct.
-Sean
Re: release 1.7.3 soon?
Posted by Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org>.
AVRO-997 would be an incompatible change so we'd have to change the
release name to 1.8.0 and folks might then reasonably adopt it more
slowly, since it might break things. I'd prefer to wait until we have
other more substantial incompatible changes; to group them together in
a single incompatible release.
Also, I don't think of AVRO-997 as a bug but rather a lack of error
checking. The proposed change is to no longer permit folks to pass a
java.lang.Enum in generic data, but rather to force them to always use
GenericEnumSymbol, or switch to using specific or reflect, which allow
java.lang.Enum for enum symbols. So if this is causing you problems,
you can simply change your code to use GenericEnumSymbol now rather
than wait until 1.8.0 forces you to make that change.
Am I missing something?
Doug
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> AVRO-997
Re: release 1.7.3 soon?
Posted by Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com>.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org> wrote:
> I hope to create a 1.7.3 release candidate in the next few days.
>
> Are there any changes folks want to get into this release?
>
> Doug
>
I'd love to see resolution on AVRO-997. I think I even like the
enforce-strict-enum-use approach better.
Since that would be breaking is it out of scope?
-Sean
Re: release 1.7.3 soon?
Posted by Maxim Pugachev <mp...@iponweb.net>.
Could anyone please review this patch:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-1163
Thanks in advance!
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:58 AM, Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org> wrote:
> I hope to create a 1.7.3 release candidate in the next few days.
>
> Are there any changes folks want to get into this release?
>
> Doug
>
Re: release 1.7.3 soon?
Posted by Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org>.
Jeff,
Somehow I missed those. I just commented on each issue. I think we
can likely include both in 1.7.3.
Thanks,
Doug
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Jeff Kolesky <je...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I submitted patches for AVRO-988 and AVRO-1209 to allow for more
> flexibility in the Java generated classes. I don't think anyone has looked
> at them, but I would love to see them go in 1.7.3 if they can.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jeff
>
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I hope to create a 1.7.3 release candidate in the next few days.
>>
>> Are there any changes folks want to get into this release?
>>
>> Doug
>>
Re: release 1.7.3 soon?
Posted by Jeff Kolesky <je...@gmail.com>.
I submitted patches for AVRO-988 and AVRO-1209 to allow for more
flexibility in the Java generated classes. I don't think anyone has looked
at them, but I would love to see them go in 1.7.3 if they can.
Thanks.
Jeff
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org> wrote:
> I hope to create a 1.7.3 release candidate in the next few days.
>
> Are there any changes folks want to get into this release?
>
> Doug
>