If we've broken compatibility in branch-2, that's a bug that we need to fix. HADOOP-10868 has not yet made it into a release; I don't see it as a justification for solidifying the breakage.
-1 to upgrading Guava in branch-2. On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 3:06 AM, Steve Loughran <ste...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > +1 to upgrading guava. Irrespective of downstream apps, the hadoop source > tree is now internally inconsistent > > On 22 September 2014 17:56, Sangjin Lee <sj...@apache.org> wrote: > > > I agree that a more robust solution is to have better classloading > > isolation. > > > > Still, IMHO guava (and possibly protobuf as well) sticks out like a sore > > thumb. There are just too many issues in trying to support both guava 11 > > and guava 16. Independent of what we may do with the classloading > > isolation, we should still consider upgrading guava. > > > > My 2 cents. > > > > On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Karthik Kambatla <ka...@cloudera.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Upgrading Guava version is tricky. While it helps in many cases, it can > > > break existing applications/deployments. I understand we do not have a > > > policy for updating dependencies, but still we should be careful with > > > Guava. > > > > > > I would be more inclined towards a more permanent solution to this > > problem > > > - how about prioritizing classpath isolation so applications aren't > > > affected by Hadoop dependency updates at all? I understand that will > also > > > break user applications, but it might be the driving feature for Hadoop > > > 3.0? > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Sangjin Lee <sj...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > I would also agree on upgrading guava. Yes I am aware of the > potential > > > > impact on customers who might rely on hadoop bringing in guava 11. > > > However, > > > > IMHO the balance tipped over to the other side a while ago; i.e. I > > think > > > > there are far more people using guava 16 in their code and scrambling > > to > > > > make things work than the other way around. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Steve Loughran < > > ste...@hortonworks.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I know we've been ignoring the Guava version problem, but > > HADOOP-10868 > > > > > added a transitive dependency on Guava 16 by way of Curator 2.6. > > > > > > > > > > Maven currently forces the build to use Guava 11.0.2, but this is > > > hiding > > > > at > > > > > compile timeall code paths from curator which may use classes & > > methods > > > > > that aren't there. > > > > > > > > > > I need curator for my own work (2.4.1 & Guava 14.0 was what I'd > been > > > > > using), so don't think we can go back. > > > > > > > > > > HADOOP-11102 covers the problem -but doesn't propose a specific > > > solution. > > > > > But to me the one that seems most likely to work is: update Guava > > > > > > > > > > -steve > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > > > > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or > > > entity > > > > to > > > > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is > > confidential, > > > > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the > > > reader > > > > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby > > notified > > > > that > > > > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or > > > > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you > have > > > > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender > > > > immediately > > > > > and delete it from your system. Thank You. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately > and delete it from your system. Thank You. >
