[jira] [Updated] (HADOOP-13493) Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a conflict is found
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Robert Kanter updated HADOOP-13493:
---
Resolution: Fixed
Hadoop Flags: Reviewed
Fix Version/s: 3.0.0
Status: Resolved (was: Patch Available)
Thanks [~templedf]. Committed to trunk and branch-3.0!
> Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a
> conflict is found
> ---
>
> Key: HADOOP-13493
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: documentation
>Affects Versions: 2.7.2
>Reporter: Robert Kanter
>Assignee: Daniel Templeton
>Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 3.0.0
>
> Attachments: HADOOP-13493.001.patch, HADOOP-13493.002.patch
>
>
> The Compatibility Docs
> (https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.7.1/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Compatibility.html#Java_API)
> list the policies for Private, Public, not annotated, etc Classes and
> members, but it doesn't say what happens when there's a conflict. We should
> try obviously try to avoid this situation, but it would be good to explicitly
> state what takes precedence.
> As an example, until YARN-3225 made it consistent, {{RefreshNodesRequest}}
> looked like this:
> {code:java}
> @Private
> @Stable
> public abstract class RefreshNodesRequest {
> @Public
> @Stable
> public static RefreshNodesRequest newInstance() {
> RefreshNodesRequest request =
> Records.newRecord(RefreshNodesRequest.class);
> return request;
> }
> }
> {code}
> Note that the class is marked {{\@Private}}, but the method is marked
> {{\@Public}}.
> In this example, I'd say that the class level should have priority.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
[jira] [Updated] (HADOOP-13493) Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a conflict is found
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Daniel Templeton updated HADOOP-13493:
--
Attachment: HADOOP-13493.002.patch
You're right--that patch was useless. :) Try this.
> Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a
> conflict is found
> ---
>
> Key: HADOOP-13493
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: documentation
>Affects Versions: 2.7.2
>Reporter: Robert Kanter
>Assignee: Daniel Templeton
>Priority: Critical
> Attachments: HADOOP-13493.001.patch, HADOOP-13493.002.patch
>
>
> The Compatibility Docs
> (https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.7.1/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Compatibility.html#Java_API)
> list the policies for Private, Public, not annotated, etc Classes and
> members, but it doesn't say what happens when there's a conflict. We should
> try obviously try to avoid this situation, but it would be good to explicitly
> state what takes precedence.
> As an example, until YARN-3225 made it consistent, {{RefreshNodesRequest}}
> looked like this:
> {code:java}
> @Private
> @Stable
> public abstract class RefreshNodesRequest {
> @Public
> @Stable
> public static RefreshNodesRequest newInstance() {
> RefreshNodesRequest request =
> Records.newRecord(RefreshNodesRequest.class);
> return request;
> }
> }
> {code}
> Note that the class is marked {{\@Private}}, but the method is marked
> {{\@Public}}.
> In this example, I'd say that the class level should have priority.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
[jira] [Updated] (HADOOP-13493) Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a conflict is found
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Daniel Templeton updated HADOOP-13493:
--
Target Version/s: 3.0.0, 3.1.0 (was: 3.1.0)
> Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a
> conflict is found
> ---
>
> Key: HADOOP-13493
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: documentation
>Affects Versions: 2.7.2
>Reporter: Robert Kanter
>Assignee: Daniel Templeton
>Priority: Critical
> Attachments: HADOOP-13493.001.patch
>
>
> The Compatibility Docs
> (https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.7.1/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Compatibility.html#Java_API)
> list the policies for Private, Public, not annotated, etc Classes and
> members, but it doesn't say what happens when there's a conflict. We should
> try obviously try to avoid this situation, but it would be good to explicitly
> state what takes precedence.
> As an example, until YARN-3225 made it consistent, {{RefreshNodesRequest}}
> looked like this:
> {code:java}
> @Private
> @Stable
> public abstract class RefreshNodesRequest {
> @Public
> @Stable
> public static RefreshNodesRequest newInstance() {
> RefreshNodesRequest request =
> Records.newRecord(RefreshNodesRequest.class);
> return request;
> }
> }
> {code}
> Note that the class is marked {{\@Private}}, but the method is marked
> {{\@Public}}.
> In this example, I'd say that the class level should have priority.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
[jira] [Updated] (HADOOP-13493) Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a conflict is found
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Daniel Templeton updated HADOOP-13493:
--
Attachment: HADOOP-13493.001.patch
See if this is enough.
> Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a
> conflict is found
> ---
>
> Key: HADOOP-13493
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: documentation
>Affects Versions: 2.7.2
>Reporter: Robert Kanter
>Assignee: Daniel Templeton
>Priority: Critical
> Attachments: HADOOP-13493.001.patch
>
>
> The Compatibility Docs
> (https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.7.1/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Compatibility.html#Java_API)
> list the policies for Private, Public, not annotated, etc Classes and
> members, but it doesn't say what happens when there's a conflict. We should
> try obviously try to avoid this situation, but it would be good to explicitly
> state what takes precedence.
> As an example, until YARN-3225 made it consistent, {{RefreshNodesRequest}}
> looked like this:
> {code:java}
> @Private
> @Stable
> public abstract class RefreshNodesRequest {
> @Public
> @Stable
> public static RefreshNodesRequest newInstance() {
> RefreshNodesRequest request =
> Records.newRecord(RefreshNodesRequest.class);
> return request;
> }
> }
> {code}
> Note that the class is marked {{\@Private}}, but the method is marked
> {{\@Public}}.
> In this example, I'd say that the class level should have priority.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
[jira] [Updated] (HADOOP-13493) Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a conflict is found
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Daniel Templeton updated HADOOP-13493:
--
Status: Patch Available (was: Open)
> Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a
> conflict is found
> ---
>
> Key: HADOOP-13493
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: documentation
>Affects Versions: 2.7.2
>Reporter: Robert Kanter
>Assignee: Daniel Templeton
>Priority: Critical
> Attachments: HADOOP-13493.001.patch
>
>
> The Compatibility Docs
> (https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.7.1/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Compatibility.html#Java_API)
> list the policies for Private, Public, not annotated, etc Classes and
> members, but it doesn't say what happens when there's a conflict. We should
> try obviously try to avoid this situation, but it would be good to explicitly
> state what takes precedence.
> As an example, until YARN-3225 made it consistent, {{RefreshNodesRequest}}
> looked like this:
> {code:java}
> @Private
> @Stable
> public abstract class RefreshNodesRequest {
> @Public
> @Stable
> public static RefreshNodesRequest newInstance() {
> RefreshNodesRequest request =
> Records.newRecord(RefreshNodesRequest.class);
> return request;
> }
> }
> {code}
> Note that the class is marked {{\@Private}}, but the method is marked
> {{\@Public}}.
> In this example, I'd say that the class level should have priority.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
[jira] [Updated] (HADOOP-13493) Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a conflict is found
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Andrew Wang updated HADOOP-13493:
-
Target Version/s: 3.0.0-beta1 (was: 3.0.0-alpha2)
> Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a
> conflict is found
> ---
>
> Key: HADOOP-13493
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: documentation
>Affects Versions: 2.7.2
>Reporter: Robert Kanter
>Assignee: Karthik Kambatla
>Priority: Critical
>
> The Compatibility Docs
> (https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.7.1/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Compatibility.html#Java_API)
> list the policies for Private, Public, not annotated, etc Classes and
> members, but it doesn't say what happens when there's a conflict. We should
> try obviously try to avoid this situation, but it would be good to explicitly
> state what takes precedence.
> As an example, until YARN-3225 made it consistent, {{RefreshNodesRequest}}
> looked like this:
> {code:java}
> @Private
> @Stable
> public abstract class RefreshNodesRequest {
> @Public
> @Stable
> public static RefreshNodesRequest newInstance() {
> RefreshNodesRequest request =
> Records.newRecord(RefreshNodesRequest.class);
> return request;
> }
> }
> {code}
> Note that the class is marked {{\@Private}}, but the method is marked
> {{\@Public}}.
> In this example, I'd say that the class level should have priority.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
[jira] [Updated] (HADOOP-13493) Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a conflict is found
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Andrew Wang updated HADOOP-13493:
-
Target Version/s: 3.0.0-alpha2 (was: 3.0.0-alpha1)
> Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a
> conflict is found
> ---
>
> Key: HADOOP-13493
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: documentation
>Affects Versions: 2.7.2
>Reporter: Robert Kanter
>Assignee: Karthik Kambatla
>Priority: Critical
>
> The Compatibility Docs
> (https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.7.1/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Compatibility.html#Java_API)
> list the policies for Private, Public, not annotated, etc Classes and
> members, but it doesn't say what happens when there's a conflict. We should
> try obviously try to avoid this situation, but it would be good to explicitly
> state what takes precedence.
> As an example, until YARN-3225 made it consistent, {{RefreshNodesRequest}}
> looked like this:
> {code:java}
> @Private
> @Stable
> public abstract class RefreshNodesRequest {
> @Public
> @Stable
> public static RefreshNodesRequest newInstance() {
> RefreshNodesRequest request =
> Records.newRecord(RefreshNodesRequest.class);
> return request;
> }
> }
> {code}
> Note that the class is marked {{\@Private}}, but the method is marked
> {{\@Public}}.
> In this example, I'd say that the class level should have priority.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
[jira] [Updated] (HADOOP-13493) Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a conflict is found
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Karthik Kambatla updated HADOOP-13493:
--
Target Version/s: 3.0.0-alpha1 (was: 2.8.0)
> Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a
> conflict is found
> ---
>
> Key: HADOOP-13493
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: documentation
>Affects Versions: 2.7.2
>Reporter: Robert Kanter
>Assignee: Karthik Kambatla
>Priority: Critical
>
> The Compatibility Docs
> (https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.7.1/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Compatibility.html#Java_API)
> list the policies for Private, Public, not annotated, etc Classes and
> members, but it doesn't say what happens when there's a conflict. We should
> try obviously try to avoid this situation, but it would be good to explicitly
> state what takes precedence.
> As an example, until YARN-3225 made it consistent, {{RefreshNodesRequest}}
> looked like this:
> {code:java}
> @Private
> @Stable
> public abstract class RefreshNodesRequest {
> @Public
> @Stable
> public static RefreshNodesRequest newInstance() {
> RefreshNodesRequest request =
> Records.newRecord(RefreshNodesRequest.class);
> return request;
> }
> }
> {code}
> Note that the class is marked {{\@Private}}, but the method is marked
> {{\@Public}}.
> In this example, I'd say that the class level should have priority.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
[jira] [Updated] (HADOOP-13493) Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a conflict is found
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Karthik Kambatla updated HADOOP-13493:
--
Target Version/s: 2.8.0
> Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a
> conflict is found
> ---
>
> Key: HADOOP-13493
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: documentation
>Affects Versions: 2.7.2
>Reporter: Robert Kanter
>Priority: Critical
>
> The Compatibility Docs
> (https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.7.1/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Compatibility.html#Java_API)
> list the policies for Private, Public, not annotated, etc Classes and
> members, but it doesn't say what happens when there's a conflict. We should
> try obviously try to avoid this situation, but it would be good to explicitly
> state what takes precedence.
> As an example, until YARN-3225 made it consistent, {{RefreshNodesRequest}}
> looked like this:
> {code:java}
> @Private
> @Stable
> public abstract class RefreshNodesRequest {
> @Public
> @Stable
> public static RefreshNodesRequest newInstance() {
> RefreshNodesRequest request =
> Records.newRecord(RefreshNodesRequest.class);
> return request;
> }
> }
> {code}
> Note that the class is marked {{\@Private}}, but the method is marked
> {{\@Public}}.
> In this example, I'd say that the class level should have priority.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
[jira] [Updated] (HADOOP-13493) Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a conflict is found
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Karthik Kambatla updated HADOOP-13493:
--
Priority: Critical (was: Major)
> Compatibility Docs should clarify the policy for what takes precedence when a
> conflict is found
> ---
>
> Key: HADOOP-13493
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13493
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: documentation
>Affects Versions: 2.7.2
>Reporter: Robert Kanter
>Priority: Critical
>
> The Compatibility Docs
> (https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.7.1/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Compatibility.html#Java_API)
> list the policies for Private, Public, not annotated, etc Classes and
> members, but it doesn't say what happens when there's a conflict. We should
> try obviously try to avoid this situation, but it would be good to explicitly
> state what takes precedence.
> As an example, until YARN-3225 made it consistent, {{RefreshNodesRequest}}
> looked like this:
> {code:java}
> @Private
> @Stable
> public abstract class RefreshNodesRequest {
> @Public
> @Stable
> public static RefreshNodesRequest newInstance() {
> RefreshNodesRequest request =
> Records.newRecord(RefreshNodesRequest.class);
> return request;
> }
> }
> {code}
> Note that the class is marked {{\@Private}}, but the method is marked
> {{\@Public}}.
> In this example, I'd say that the class level should have priority.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
