@arina-ielchiieva / @vvysotskyi I don't see a benefit of blindly replacing Guava classes/methods with JDK ones that provide equivalent or similar functionality. It should be sufficient to replace deprecated and unstable classes/methods. So, even though an enormous amount of work was done, I don't see how Drill and drill dev community benefit from that work. I already mentioned that in my review comments and also on the mailing list. IMO, it will be more beneficial for Drill customers to resolve DRILL-6422 and #1264.
@arina-ielchiieva: - I don't share your concern with PR being open for a month. In Apache PR may be open for much longer and there are multiple examples of PRs being open for 2, 3 and more month in Drill and other Apache projects. - I agree that it is not only possible but it is much better not to fix all problems in one PR. In some cases, instead of a follow up JIRA that may never be fixed, I'd prefer to see a pre-cursor JIRA and PR and this PR is an example where I'd like to see several Drill classes being removed or refactored first (due to a larger benefit that I see for removing those classes compared to removing Guava classes). [ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/drill/pull/1397 ] This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for [email protected]
