On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 10:56AM, Suresh Srinivas wrote: > Javadoc did not capture the intent well. Please see HADOOP-5073. We should > fix the Javadoc to avoid confusion. > > Even though there are only few instances of LimitedPrivate, I prefer > retaining. I prefer to keep MiniDFSCluster LimitedPrivate and not support as > as public interface.
Suresh, but MiniDFSCluster is a test facility with a somewhat limited functionality. It isn't that important really if it has LimitedPrivate or Private annotation. Cos > On 6/9/11 10:27 AM, "Tom White" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Looking at current usage in Hadoop, there are only 4 LimitedPrivate > > references to HBase (the http, io.retry, ipc, and metrics packages in > > Common), and 2 references to Pig (the two LineRecordReader classes in > > MapReduce). The other LimitedPrivate references are all to HDFS or > > MapReduce. Given that Private means "Intended for use only within > > Hadoop itself" (according to the javadoc), we can replace these > > references with Private. > > > > We could also change the remaining 6 cases of LimitedPrivate to Public > > (note that they are already annotated Evolving or Unstable), and > > deprecate LimitedPrivate. Would this allay people's concerns? > > > > Cheers, > > Tom > > > > On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Eric Baldeschwieler > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I'd like to see a proposal circulated to handle this concern in a > >> maintainable way. > >> > >> On Jun 8, 2011, at 9:17 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > >> > >>>> From: Allen Wittenauer <[email protected]> > >>>> ═ ═ OK. ═That's make it easier to just > >>>> -1 changes like this with reasoning such as "HBase is not a > >>>> related project." Then we can go back working on core > >>>> Hadoop. > >>> > >>> Seriously? > >>> > >>> Forget what I said about filing a JIRA (and working on it) to give > >>> HttpServer an extensibility that possibly would past muster with you. > >>> > >>> ═- Andy > >>> > >>> > >> > >> >
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
