srowen commented on issue #23607: [SPARK-26681][SQL] Support Ammonite
inner-class scopes.
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23607#issuecomment-459702010
I also can't feel strongly either way. If the issue is simply, "what if 10
more projects want something like this" or "what if
srowen commented on issue #23607: [SPARK-26681][SQL] Support Ammonite
inner-class scopes.
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23607#issuecomment-459170979
I agree with all that, but I don't think this constitutes official support,
nor do I see a case for formally supporting or
srowen commented on issue #23607: [SPARK-26681][SQL] Support Ammonite
inner-class scopes.
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23607#issuecomment-459064462
Sure, I mean, YARN, ORC, ganglia, tachyon in the past? etc, etc. Spark has a
lot of code to support third-party things as you
srowen commented on issue #23607: [SPARK-26681][SQL] Support Ammonite
inner-class scopes.
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23607#issuecomment-459053642
I don't mind having this tiny bit of code to support a third-party library,
if that's all there is to it. Wouldn't want to make
srowen commented on issue #23607: [SPARK-26681][SQL] Support Ammonite
inner-class scopes.
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23607#issuecomment-456829410
Merged to master
This is an automated message from the Apache
srowen commented on issue #23607: [SPARK-26681][SQL] Support Ammonite
inner-class scopes.
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23607#issuecomment-456490800
It doesn't seem to hurt anything else, and if it makes a use case work, sure
seems fine as-is.
