I'm -1(*) because, while it technically means "might be removed in the future", I think developers and users are more prone to interpret something being marked as deprecated as "very likely will be removed in the future, so don't depend on this or waste your time contributing to its further development." I don't think the latter is what we want just because something hasn't been updated meaningfully in a while. There have been How To articles for GraphX and Graph Frames posted in the not too distant past, and the Google Search trend shows a pretty steady level of interest, not a decline to zero, so I don't think that it is accurate to declare that there is no use or interest in GraphX.
Unless retaining GraphX is imposing significant costs on continuing Spark development, I can't support deprecating GraphX. I can support encouraging GraphX and Graph Frames development through something like a To Do list or document of "What we'd like to see in the way of further development of Spark's graph processing capabilities" -- i.e., things that encourage and support new contributions to address any shortcomings in Spark's graph processing, not things that discourage contributions and use in the way that I believe simply declaring GraphX to be deprecated would. On Sun, Sep 29, 2024 at 11:04 AM Holden Karau <holden.ka...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Since we're getting close to cutting a 4.0 branch I'd like to float the idea > of officially deprecating Graph X. What that would mean (to me) is we would > update the docs to indicate that Graph X is deprecated and it's APIs may be > removed at anytime in the future. > > Alternatively, we could mark it as "unmaintained and in search of > maintainers" with a note that if no maintainers are found, we may remove it > in a future minor version. > > Looking at the source graph X, I don't see any meaningful active development > going back over three years*. There is even a thread on user@ from 2017 > asking if graph X is maintained anymore, with no response from the developers. > > Now I'm open to the idea that GraphX is stable and "works as is" and simply > doesn't require modifications but given the user thread I'm a little > concerned here about bringing this API with us into Spark 4 if we don't have > anyone signed up to maintain it. > > * Excluding globally applied changes > -- > Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau > Fight Health Insurance: https://www.fighthealthinsurance.com/ > Books (Learning Spark, High Performance Spark, etc.): https://amzn.to/2MaRAG9 > YouTube Live Streams: https://www.youtube.com/user/holdenkarau > Pronouns: she/her --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
