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 < [email protected]> 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" <[email protected]> > 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 <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > re Chris: I do not have any good idea about this..... > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Chris Olivier < > [email protected]> > > 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 <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > and additional suggestion is do it ASAP > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Chris Olivier < > [email protected] > > > > > > > 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 < > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > 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 < > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We need to change the namespace as soon as possible. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Roshani Nagmote < > > > > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 to change the namespace > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Chris Olivier < > > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > 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 < > > > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > > 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 < > > > > > > > > > > [email protected]> 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 < > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 < > > > > > > > > > >> > [email protected]> 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 < > > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > 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 < > > > > > > > > > >> > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Right > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Chris Olivier <[email protected]> > 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 > > < > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > +1 for changing the namespace > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -1 for merging this change into master > > according > > > > to > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > >> current > > > > > > > > > >> > > > policy > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Chris Olivier <[email protected]> > 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 < > > > > > > > > > >> > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > 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 < > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
