On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 6:37 AM, Tom Graves <tgraves...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote: > So we definitely need to be careful here. I know you didn't mention it but > it mentioned by others so I would not recommend using LimitedPrivate. I had > started a discussion on Hadoop about some of this due to the way Spark > needed to use some of the Api's. > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10506 >
I think LimitedPrivate gets a bad rap due to the way it is misused in Hadoop. The use case here -- "we offer this to developers of intermediate layers; those willing to update their software as we update ours" -- is a perfectly acceptable distinction from the "this is just for us" and "this is something folks can rely on enough to contract out their software development". Essentially, LimitedPrivate(LIBRARY) or LimitedPrivate(PORCELAIN) (to borrow from git's distinction on interfaces for tool makers vs end users). -- busbey --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@spark.apache.org
