Re: [VOTE] Amend Spark's Semantic Versioning Policy

+1 (non-binding) Sent from my iPhone Pardon the dumb thumb typos :) > On Mar 6, 2020, at 7:09 PM, Sean Owen wrote: > > +1 > >> On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 8:59 PM Michael Armbrust >> wrote: >> >> I propose to add the following text to Spark's Semantic Versioning policy >> and adopt it as the

Re: [VOTE] Amend Spark's Semantic Versioning Policy

I am in broad agreement with the prposal, as any developer, I prefer stable well designed API's :-) Can we tie the proposal to stability guarantees given by spark and reasonable expectation from users ? In my opinion, an unstable or evolving could change - while an experimental api which has been

Re: [VOTE] Amend Spark's Semantic Versioning Policy

+1 On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 8:59 PM Michael Armbrust wrote: > > I propose to add the following text to Spark's Semantic Versioning policy and > adopt it as the rubric that should be used when deciding to break APIs (even > at major versions such as 3.0). > > > I'll leave the vote open until

Re: [VOTE] Amend Spark's Semantic Versioning Policy

I'll start off the vote with a strong +1 (binding). On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 1:01 PM Michael Armbrust wrote: > I propose to add the following text to Spark's Semantic Versioning policy > and adopt it as the > rubric that should be used when

[VOTE] Amend Spark's Semantic Versioning Policy

I propose to add the following text to Spark's Semantic Versioning policy and adopt it as the rubric that should be used when deciding to break APIs (even at major versions such as 3.0). I'll leave the vote open until Tuesday, March 10th at 2pm.

Re: [Proposal] Modification to Spark's Semantic Versioning Policy

This thread established some good general principles, illustrated by a few good examples. It didn't draw specific conclusions about what to add back, which is why it wasn't at all controversial. What it means in specific cases is where there may be disagreement, and that harder question hasn't

Re: Spark-3.0 - performance degradation

Can you provide configuration information? -- Sent from: http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/ - To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org

Re: Spark-3.0 - performance degradation

Can you provide configuration information? -- Sent from: http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/ - To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org

[DISCUSS][SPARK-23889] DataSourceV2: required sorting and clustering for writes

Hi devs, I want to follow up on the dev list discussion [1] and the JIRA issue [2] created as a result of it and propose a

Re: Spark-3.0 - performance degradation

Can you show the running configuration information? -- Sent from: http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/ - To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org

Re: [Proposal] Modification to Spark's Semantic Versioning Policy

Hi, All. Recently, reverting PRs seems to start to spread like the *well-known* virus. Can we finalize this first before doing unofficial personal decisions? Technically, this thread was not a vote and our website doesn't have a clear policy yet. https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/27821