I don't have any issue with un-deprecating the old APIs. I agree if
changes are needed it's better to mark the new APIs to reflect it. I
just hope those changes can be kept as backward compatible as
possible. In particular with Job, Pig uses that in some of it's APIs
that it has declared stable (LoadFunc, StoreFunc).
Alan.
On Apr 22, 2010, at 11:30 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
Alan,
On Apr 22, 2010, at 12:12 PM, Alan Gates wrote:
Speaking for one power user (Pig) that did move to the new APIs,
moving that interface to evolving is a little unsettling. Is there
a feel for how much the new API is going to change?
The intent isn't to mark the 'new' apis as 'Evolving' to change them
willy-nilly... please don't read it so!
This is just a pragmatic proposal to reflect that the 'old' apis
will, for lack of stabilization of new apis, be supported.
Given that, the new apis could mostly be stable, but for Job and
Cluster - is that reasonable? This will ensure we send the right
message all concerned regarding stability of o.a.h.mapreduce.{Mapper|
Reducer|...}. Thoughts?
Arun
Alan.
