Github user rxin commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/21598
Itâs actually common software engineering practice to keep âbuggyâ
semantics if a bug has been out there long enough and a lot of applications
depend on the semantics.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 9:18 AM Hyukjin Kwon <notificati...@github.com>
wrote:
> I don't think it's too discretionary. We have a safeguard to control the
> behaviour. Spark mentions it in the migration guide. In case of changing
> public interface which breaks binary or source compatibility, there should
> really be strong argument, sure. For clarification, I don't think such
> change is made usually.
>
> In this case, it changes a behaviour even with a safeguard. Sounds pretty
> minor. I wonder why this is suddenly poped up. As I said, if the standards
> don't reflect the practice, the standards should be corrected or the
> practice should be complied. Committer's judgement is needed time to time.
> We need more committers for the more proper review iteration. Let's back
it
> roll.
>
> If you prefer more conservative distribution, it should be an option to
> consider using a maintenance release.
>
> we may choose to retain that buggy behavior
>
> I strongly disagree. We should fix the buggy behavior. There's no point of
> having upper versions.
>
> If you strongly doubt it, please open a discussion in the mailing list and
> see if we get agreed at some point.
>
> â
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/21598#issuecomment-400372980>, or
mute
> the thread
>
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AATvPGegZOtghAWSAzJFk-PHGWTMthCMks5uAl7VgaJpZM4UvHQD>
> .
>
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
