Hi Wenchen, Could you please wait for https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/50246 to be merged before you cut the next RC?
Thanks, Huaxin On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 8:53 PM Wenchen Fan <cloud0...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > Thanks for your feedback! Regarding > https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/50187 , I don't think it's a 4.0 > blocker as it's a CI issue for the examples module. Other than that, all > other issues have been resolved and I'll cut the next RC after > https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/50197 is merged, which updates the > to-be-released stored procedure DS v2 API. > > Thanks, > Wenchen > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 7:36 PM Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls...@apache.org> wrote: > >> -1. >> >> Scala and PySpark shell are broken by >> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/49971. Reverted it for now. >> >> On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 at 12:36, Yang Jie <yangji...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> -1, >>> >>> The pull request at https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/49604 >>> introduced a connection-related example module and successfully merged it >>> into branch-4.0, which is a commendable achievement. >>> >>> However, it is recommended that this example module should rely on the >>> snapshot version of its corresponding development branch. Subsequently, >>> after the release of a new version, it should be updated to depend on the >>> latest released version of that branch, rather than a historical or preview >>> release version (for instance, in the v4.0.0 tag, it should depend on Spark >>> 4.0.0 instead of 4.0.0-preview2). It appears that the pull request at >>> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/50187 is currently discussing and >>> addressing this issue; however, it is still in progress. I firmly believe >>> that this issue should be resolved before the release of Apache Spark 4.0.0. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Jie Yang >>> >>> On 2025/03/23 01:26:43 Ángel Álvarez Pascua wrote: >>> > Great to hear that! >>> > >>> > Fortunately, I was waiting for someone to answer and hadn't looked at >>> it >>> > yet. >>> > >>> > Seems a quite straightforward solution for an issue that shouldn't >>> have to >>> > exist if the right unit test had been implemented. What do you think >>> about >>> > adding a test to check this issue doesn't happen again? >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > I'm planning to write an article about Spark Connect, so ... thanks >>> again >>> > for providing the project to start playing around. >>> > >>> > El dom, 23 mar 2025, 2:01, Bobby <wbo4...@gmail.com> escribió: >>> > >>> > > Thx @Ángel <angel.alvarez.pas...@gmail.com> , I had a PR >>> > > https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/50334 to fix it. Please help >>> review. >>> > > >>> > > Ángel Álvarez Pascua <angel.alvarez.pas...@gmail.com> 于2025年3月22日周六 >>> > > 16:27写道： >>> > > >>> > >> Is anyone looking into this issue? If not, I'd like to try fixing >>> it. >>> > >> I've never tried out Spark Connect, so... 2x1! (way better than >>> spending >>> > >> the weekend binge-watching on Netflix 😅🤣). >>> > >> >>> > >> @Bobby <wbo4...@gmail.com> , thanks a lot, not only for reporting >>> the >>> > >> issue but also for providing a time-saving project for testing. >>> > >> >>> > >> El sáb, 22 mar 2025 a las 1:11, Bobby (<wbo4...@gmail.com>) >>> escribió: >>> > >> >>> > >>> I think https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-51537 should >>> be >>> > >>> fixed before 4.0.0 release, or else, the executor side will not >>> use global >>> > >>> jars added by `--jars` in the connect mode, which could result in >>> > >>> deserialization exceptions. >>> > >>> >>> > >> >>> > >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org >>> >>>
