Note, per the first item above, I've put together an initial proposal of the compatibility commitments we should make to the users. It is important to note that my outline is about our public commitment. As a development community, we should always work to avoid disruptive or backwards incompatible changes on public apis even if the our public commitment policy doesn't dictate it.
The proposal is attached here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-4600 -- Jacques Nadeau CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Jacques Nadeau <[email protected]> wrote: > Notes: > > Attendees: Paul, Parth, Zelaine, Jacques, Arrina, Vittali, Aman > > Main topics of discussion: > > Backwards compatibility. Everybody thinks that striving for backwards > compatibility is good. However, we need to be formal about our goals as > well as real costs to maintain. Jacques to put together and propose on the > list a strawman of the various compatibility points in the product as well > as what types of compatibility are critical, nice-to-have, low priority, > etc. > > Arrow code patch merge. Some concerns were raised about the impact of > relying on Arrow as an external project. The size and complexity of the > patch was also challenging to consume. Jacques to work with Steven to make > patch more consumable and then have a follow-on discussion around the > purpose of various changes. > > > > > -- > Jacques Nadeau > CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Jacques Nadeau <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/dremio.com/drillhangout?authuser=0 >> >> >> -- >> Jacques Nadeau >> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio >> > >
