Maintaining backwards compatibility never results in the prettiest code,
but it seems pretty desirable here.  There are relatively few files here,
so I agree there's some risk but I don't think it would take too much
time.  Feel free to suggest alternatives Christopher.

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:56 PM, Barber, Christopher <
christopher.bar...@analog.com> wrote:

> That sounds like a lot of work and it would be easy to get wrong if it is
> even feasible.
>
> On 3/13/18, 11:51 AM, "kellen sunderland" <kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>     I don't know about aliasing a namespace in Scala, but I wonder how
> hard it
>     would be to either (1) provide a fascade from the new package to the
> old
>     package or (2) keep two copies of the scala code temporarily along
> with two
>     copies of the JNI entry points.  In both of these cases we could setup
>     @deprecated on all public calls to the old package.
>
>     On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:47 PM, Nan Zhu <zhunanmcg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>     > re Chris: I do not have any good idea about this.....
>     >
>     > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Chris Olivier <
> cjolivie...@gmail.com>
>     > wrote:
>     >
>     > > is it possible to somehow alias a namespace in scala
>     > > in order to maintain backwards compatibility?
>     > >
>     > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM Nan Zhu <zhunanmcg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>     > >
>     > > > +1
>     > > >
>     > > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP
>     > > >
>     > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier <
> cjolivie...@gmail.com
>     > >
>     > > > wrote:
>     > > >
>     > > > > not sure I understand. How could changing a java namespace
>     > (effectively
>     > > > > moving the files to a different location as well as changing
> the
>     > > package
>     > > > > names) be backward-compatible?
>     > > > >
>     > > > >
>     > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:02 PM Steffen Rochel <
>     > > steffenroc...@gmail.com
>     > > > >
>     > > > > wrote:
>     > > > >
>     > > > > > I suggest the vote should call out if the change is breaking
>     > backward
>     > > > > > compatibility or not.
>     > > > > > I looked through the scala name changing thread and don't see
>     > > > > justification
>     > > > > > for a backward incompatible change.
>     > > > > > I do agree it would be good to change the name space, but
> have not
>     > > > seen a
>     > > > > > reason why the change has to be made now in backward
> incompatible
>     > > way.
>     > > > > > Non-binding vote:
>     > > > > > +1 for backward compatible namespace change
>     > > > > > -1 for backward incompatible namespace change
>     > > > > >
>     > > > > > Suggest to explore package aliasing for a backward compatible
>     > change
>     > > -
>     > > > > see
>     > > > > > a possible idea at
>     > > > > >
>     > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28238520/python-
>     > > > > like-package-name-aliasing-in-scala
>     > > > > >
>     > > > > >
>     > > > > > Steffen
>     > > > > >
>     > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Rahul Huilgol <
>     > > rahulhuil...@gmail.com
>     > > > >
>     > > > > > wrote:
>     > > > > >
>     > > > > > > +1
>     > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > We need to change the namespace as soon as possible.
>     > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Roshani Nagmote <
>     > > > > > > roshaninagmo...@gmail.com>
>     > > > > > > wrote:
>     > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > +1 to change the namespace
>     > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Chris Olivier <
>     > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com>
>     > > > > > > > wrote:
>     > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > The assumption is that it would be changed more-or-less
>     > > > > immediately.
>     > > > > > > ie.
>     > > > > > > > > this is like a voted PR, I guess.
>     > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Chris Olivier <
>     > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com>
>     > > > > > > > > wrote:
>     > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > > It is about changing the namespace.  As far as I
> know, the
>     > > > > version
>     > > > > > > > number
>     > > > > > > > > > of the next release is not defined.
>     > > > > > > > > > At such point where a release is announced, one could
>     > > comment,
>     > > > > vote
>     > > > > > > > > > whatever on the chosen version of that release, I
> suppose.
>     > > But
>     > > > > > > that's
>     > > > > > > > > > beyond the scope of this vote, because the "next
> release"
>     > is
>     > > > not
>     > > > > > yet
>     > > > > > > > > > defined.
>     > > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Marco de Abreu <
>     > > > > > > > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>     > > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> Just for clarification: Is this vote about changing
> the
>     > > > > namespace
>     > > > > > > with
>     > > > > > > > > the
>     > > > > > > > > >> next release?
>     > > > > > > > > >>
>     > > > > > > > > >> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Naveen Swamy <
>     > > > > mnnav...@gmail.com
>     > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > wrote:
>     > > > > > > > > >>
>     > > > > > > > > >> > Chris, Thanks for starting this vote.
>     > > > > > > > > >> > This is long pending
>     > > > > > > > > >> >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > +1 to change org.apache namespace
>     > > > > > > > > >> >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Marco de Abreu <
>     > > > > > > > > >> > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>     > > > > > > > > >> >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > I gave my +1 for the code modification. The -1
> was for
>     > > Nan
>     > > > > > Zhus
>     > > > > > > > > >> proposal
>     > > > > > > > > >> > to
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > get it into 1.2.
>     > > > > > > > > >> > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 6:18 PM, Chris Olivier <
>     > > > > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com
>     > > > > > > > > >> >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > wrote:
>     > > > > > > > > >> > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > If you're tying this to a process issue, then
> it's
>     > no
>     > > > > > longer a
>     > > > > > > > > code
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > modification technical vote.
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 9:56 AM, Marco de
> Abreu <
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Right
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Chris Olivier <cjolivie...@gmail.com>
> schrieb am
>     > > Mo.,
>     > > > > 12.
>     > > > > > > > März
>     > > > > > > > > >> 2018,
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > 17:38:
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Are you saying your vote is contingent
> upon the
>     > > > > outcome
>     > > > > > > of a
>     > > > > > > > > >> > separate
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > vote?
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 9:37 AM, Marco de
> Abreu
>     > <
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > marco.g.ab...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > +1 for changing the namespace
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -1 for merging this change into master
>     > according
>     > > > to
>     > > > > > the
>     > > > > > > > > >> current
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > policy
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Chris Olivier <cjolivie...@gmail.com>
> schrieb
>     > > am
>     > > > > Mo.,
>     > > > > > > 12.
>     > > > > > > > > >> März
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > 2018,
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 17:34:
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Release versioning is a separate
> issue or
>     > > vote.
>     > > > > At
>     > > > > > > > > release
>     > > > > > > > > >> > time,
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > people
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > can "demand" version X or Y.  This
> vote
>     > > > represents
>     > > > > > "do
>     > > > > > > > we
>     > > > > > > > > >> want
>     > > > > > > > > >> > to
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > change
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > the namespace".
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 9:30 AM, Nan
> Zhu <
>     > > > > > > > > >> > zhunanmcg...@gmail.com
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote:
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I think we'd specify it will change
> in the
>     > > > next
>     > > > > > > > version
>     > > > > > > > > >> > (1.2)?
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 9:26 AM,
> Chris
>     > > > Olivier <
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > cjolivie...@gmail.com>
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > This vote is for the code-change
> of
>     > > altering
>     > > > > the
>     > > > > > > > Scala
>     > > > > > > > > >> API
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > namespace
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > from
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > dmlc to org.apache.
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Vote will conclude on Thursday,
> 5pm PDT.
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Thank you,
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > -Chris
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> > >
>     > > > > > > > > >> >
>     > > > > > > > > >>
>     > > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > >
>     > > > > > >
>     > > > > > >
>     > > > > > >
>     > > > > > > --
>     > > > > > > Rahul Huilgol
>     > > > > > >
>     > > > > >
>     > > > >
>     > > >
>     > >
>     >
>
>
>

Reply via email to