If possible, can we hide all compatibility-breaking features behind the
*same* flag, so as to limit the combinatorial explosion of features turned
on and off?

On 3 November 2016 at 16:50, Daniel Hecht <[email protected]> wrote:

> +1 for using flags to avoid branching too early, and then flipping the
> defaults for 3.0 (and eventually removing the old code paths in/after
> 3.0).  Of course, not everything can be handled this way, but many can.
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Jim Apple <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Does anyone else have any thoughts, ideas, or concerns?
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Jim Apple <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > I like this idea a lot.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Tim Armstrong <
> [email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >> I think we should also have a period leading up to the branching where
> > we
> > >> can add incompatible changes guarded by flags. I think otherwise it
> > will be
> > >> a headache trying to stage things (realistically some
> > >> compatibility-breaking changes will be ready early and we don't want
> to
> > >> have them sitting off to the side bit-rotting).
> > >>
> > >> One case is getting Impala to work against the latest
> Hadoop/Hive/HBase
> > >> APIs - there were incompatible changes but it would be great to have
> > master
> > >> buildable against both versions.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Jim Apple <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> The most recent release was 2.7.0. We have 32 issues that we might
> > >>> want to tackle for 3.0:
> > >>>
> > >>> https://issues.cloudera.org/issues/?filter=11830
> > >>>
> > >>> Does anyone have any thoughts about how to organize this? For
> instance
> > >>> we might decide:
> > >>>
> > >>> 0. Starting immediately, the community is encouraged to submit issues
> > >>> that would break compatibility. Detailed designs are also encouraged.
> > >>>
> > >>> 1. After 2.9.0, commits that break compatibility will be allowed in
> > >>> the "master" branch.
> > >>>
> > >>> 2. After 2.9.0 a call will go out for anyone who wants to get a
> > >>> compatibility-breaking patch in that they have 3 months to do so.
> > >>>
> > >>> 3. After three months, we'll cut a new release candidate and bump all
> > >>> JIRA issues that would break compatibility to Target Version: Impala
> > >>> 4.0
> > >>>
> > >>> Thoughts?
> > >>>
> >
>



-- 
Henry Robinson
Software Engineer
Cloudera
415-994-6679

Reply via email to