Hey David,

I just checked in pypi and didn't see the new version. You still planning
on doing this?

Thx,

J-D

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 10:43 AM, David Alves <[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks, Wes.
> Ok, I'll bump the version to 0.2.0 and release what we have, which hasn't
> changed since the last kudu release.
> If we go a few releases without needing different releases for the python
> client then we can make it match.
> I'll do the release to pypi today.
>
> -david
>
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Wes McKinney <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I'm fine with releasing them at the same time, but I would propose
> > that we use separate version numbering to avoid potential confusion in
> > the future should the releases decouple. If different version numbers
> > cause some concern, then using the same number for now is OK as long
> > as we aren't closing the door on faster releases (for example: urgent
> > bug fixes — I suspect that the Python client will in general have
> > strictly more bugs than the C++ client) in the future.
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 10:32 AM, David Alves <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > If we're bumping and if everyone agrees I propose we just bum the
> version
> > > to match kudu and, for now at least, go with the plan of releasing the
> > > python client at the same time as the rest of kudu.
> > > Wes: you ok with that?
> > >
> > > -david
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Todd Lipcon <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> So, right now our PyPI package is incompatible with the latest
> releases
> > >> due to some client ABI changes. For now, I'd propose we bump the
> > version to
> > >> 0.2.0.
> > >>
> > >> Regarding release cadence, keep in mind that we need to do a vote
> before
> > >> any public release (even if it's just the python client). So, I'm not
> > sure
> > >> how realistic it is to have a significantly faster python release
> > cadence
> > >> than the rest of the software.
> > >>
> > >> -Todd
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Adar Dembo <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Wes and I discussed this very issue in
> > >>> http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/1593 two months ago.
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Casey Ching <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> > I’d also go with separating the version numbers. Hopefully
> eventually
> > >>> the
> > >>> > client api will be stable and won’t change much, then a new Kudu
> > release
> > >>> > won’t require a python release. If the version are made to match,
> > there
> > >>> > should come a time when the python version number needs to be
> bumped
> > >>> just
> > >>> > to keep the versions in sync though no actual python/client changes
> > were
> > >>> > made.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > If you are worried about client/server compatibility, maybe there
> is
> > >>> > something that can be done such that the client/server verify that
> > they
> > >>> are
> > >>> > in fact compatible through some api call.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Casey
> > >>> > On March 9, 2016 at 4:10:40 PM, David Alves ([email protected]
> )
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > We intend to produce Kudu releases every couple of months.
> > >>> > It's also worth noting that while we can keep a different release
> > >>> cadence
> > >>> > for the python client we still need to go through a vote and do a
> > proper
> > >>> > release.
> > >>> > Do you feel like its worth the additional work to increase the
> > cadence
> > >>> or
> > >>> > do you feel that 2 months is likely enough?
> > >>> > As an alternative we could have a primary plan to make the
> > major/minor
> > >>> > versions match and release in the same cadence, but reserve the
> right
> > >>> to do
> > >>> > ad-hoc micro releases occasionally.
> > >>> > Thoughts?
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Best
> > >>> > David
> > >>> >
> > >>> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Wes McKinney <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > > Since I expect the Python client to evolve faster from a user
> > >>> > > perspective (as opposed to Kudu core, where users will see
> > basically a
> > >>> > > stable client API and wire protocol in general) I'd prefer to
> make
> > >>> > > Python releases separate from Kudu major/minor releases. For
> > example,
> > >>> > > sometime in the next couple months I would like to add low-level
> > >>> > > (C-level) interoperability between pandas, NumPy, and Kudu. It
> > would
> > >>> > > be nice to be able to ship this basically as soon as it's
> > available in
> > >>> > > trunk. This is somewhat independent from the version numbering
> > >>> > > question, but it would probably be better for the Python client
> and
> > >>> > > interop tools to have their own version number. If the Kudu
> > committers
> > >>> > > feel otherwise, it's not an issue -- some of this depends on the
> > >>> > > expected release cadence of Kudu itself.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > best,
> > >>> > > Wes
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 3:49 PM, David Alves <
> [email protected]
> > >
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>> > > > Hi All
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > We'll need to release a new version of the python client to
> pypi
> > >>> and we
> > >>> > > > were discussing versioning strategies.
> > >>> > > > Currently the python's client version does not match the
> version
> > of
> > >>> the
> > >>> > > > c++ client/server (0.1.0 versus 0.7.1) and we can either stick
> > with
> > >>> > that
> > >>> > > > and keep different versions, or change it to match the latest
> > Kudu
> > >>> > > release.
> > >>> > > > Making the versions match would have the advantage of making it
> > >>> clear
> > >>> > > to
> > >>> > > > developers if the server/client versions match or not, which
> > might
> > >>> help
> > >>> > > > weeding out compatibility bugs. On the other hand keeping
> > different
> > >>> > > > versions would likely make our lives easier if we want to
> release
> > >>> the
> > >>> > > > python client at a different cadence of regular Kudu releases.
> > >>> > > > What do people think?
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > Best
> > >>> > > > David
> > >>> > >
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Todd Lipcon
> > >> Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > >>
> >
>

Reply via email to