I was thinking about a similar option too but I ended up giving this up .. It's quite unlikely at this moment but suppose that we have another Spark Connect-ish component in the far future and it would be challenging to come up with another name ... Another case is that we might have to cope with the cases like Spark Connect, vs Spark (with Spark Connect) and Spark (without Spark Connect) ..
On Sun, 21 Jul 2024 at 09:59, Holden Karau <holden.ka...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think perhaps Spark Connect could be phrased as “Basic* Spark” & > existing Spark could be “Full Spark” given the API limitations of Spark > connect. > > *I was also thinking Core here but we’ve used core to refer to the RDD > APIs for too long to reuse it here. > > Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau > Books (Learning Spark, High Performance Spark, etc.): > https://amzn.to/2MaRAG9 <https://amzn.to/2MaRAG9> > YouTube Live Streams: https://www.youtube.com/user/holdenkarau > > > On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 8:02 PM Xiao Li <gatorsm...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Classic is much better than Legacy. : ) >> >> Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls...@apache.org> 于2024年7月18日周四 16:58写道： >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I noticed that we need to standardize our terminology before moving >>> forward. For instance, when documenting, 'Spark without Spark Connect' is >>> too long and verbose. Additionally, I've observed that we use various names >>> for Spark without Spark Connect: Spark Classic, Classic Spark, Legacy >>> Spark, etc. >>> >>> I propose that we consistently refer to it as Spark Classic (vs. Spark >>> Connect). >>> >>> Please share your thoughts on this. Thanks! >>> >>
