Re: [DISCUSS] End of life for Hive 1.x, 2.x, 3.x

Thanks everyone for sharing your thoughts. I am happy to see so many people involved in the discussion. I would say that the current 4.0.0-alpha-1 is better in many aspects than previous stable releases, although this might be a bit subjective. I am afraid that if we keep supporting older

Re: [DISCUSS] End of life for Hive 1.x, 2.x, 3.x

We maintain our own fork of Hive 3 because we are not always adding new commits to the tip of the branch. To backport a new patch, sometimes we have to add new commits between existing commits, update earlier commits, and so on. This makes it impractical to keep adding new patches only to the tip

Re: [DISCUSS] End of life for Hive 1.x, 2.x, 3.x

When we were brainstorming about the future of the Hive 3 branch with Zoltan Haindrich, he mentioned this letter: https://lists.apache.org/thread/by9ppc2z8oqdzpqotzv5bs34yrxrd84l I think Sungwoo Park and his team makes a huge

Re: [DISCUSS] End of life for Hive 1.x, 2.x, 3.x

Agree to Peter and sunchao.. Even we are using the hive 3.x, we might contribute on bugfixes. Even I am +1 on 1.x EOL as it's hard to maintain so many releases and time to user's migrate to 2.x and 3.x. On 09/05/22, 10:51 PM, "Chao Sun" wrote: Agree to Peter above. I know quite a few

Re: [DISCUSS] End of life for Hive 1.x, 2.x, 3.x

Shall we put the core/shading to the blocker for 4.0.0? Do we have a jira for it? Thanks Sun Chao for bringing this up! Peter On Mon, May 9, 2022, 19:21 Chao Sun wrote: > Agree to Peter above. I know quite a few projects such as Spark, > Iceberg and Trino/Presto are depending on Hive 2.x and

Re: [DISCUSS] End of life for Hive 1.x, 2.x, 3.x

Agree to Peter above. I know quite a few projects such as Spark, Iceberg and Trino/Presto are depending on Hive 2.x and 3.x, and periodically they may need new fixes in these. Upgrading them to use 4.x seems not an option for now since the core classified artifact has been removed and the shading

Re: [DISCUSS] End of life for Hive 1.x, 2.x, 3.x

Hi Team, My experience with the Iceberg community shows that there are some sizeable userbase around Hive 2.x. I have seen patches, contributions to Hive 2.3.x branches, and the tests are in much better shape there. I would definitely vote for EOL Hive 1.x, but until we have a stable 4.x, I

Re: [DISCUSS] End of life for Hive 1.x, 2.x, 3.x

Hi Stamatis, thanks for bringing up this topic, I basically agree on everything you wrote. I just wanted to add that this kind of proposal might sound harsh, because in many contexts upgrading is a complex process, but it's in nobody's interest to keep release branches that are missing important

[DISCUSS] End of life for Hive 1.x, 2.x, 3.x

Hi all, The current master has many critical bug fixes as well as important performance improvements that are not backported (and most likely never will) to the maintenance branches. Backporting changes from master usually requires adapting the code and tests in questions making it a non-trivial

[DISCUSS] End of life for Hive 1.x, 2.x, 3.x

Hi all, The current master has many critical bug fixes as well as important performance improvements that are not backported (and most likely never will) to the maintenance branches. Backporting changes from master usually requires adapting the code and tests in questions making it a non-trivial