Yeah, I should have been precise. I was referring to the Hadoop annotations
regarding visibility/stability, not java's visibility.
On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Ravi Prakash wrote:
> Thanks for the clarification. "regardless of the method
> visibility/stability"
Thanks for the clarification. "regardless of the method
visibility/stability" confused me for a bit.
On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote:
> No, private methods are free to change as far as the class contract is
> concerned.
>
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:30 AM,
No, private methods are free to change as far as the class contract is
concerned.
On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Ravi Prakash wrote:
> Would this mean that if there is a private method in MyPublicStableClass,
> changing which wouldn't break anything, could we still not
Would this mean that if there is a private method in MyPublicStableClass,
changing which wouldn't break anything, could we still not change it?
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote:
> Resurrecting an old thread as part of the YARN bug bash (YARN-5130).
>
> At
Resurrecting an old thread as part of the YARN bug bash (YARN-5130).
At minimum, I believe we agree to the following (do let me know if that is
not the case):
(1) If the class is declared Public/Stable, no changes to the class that
breaks the Stable contract should be made between non-major
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Chris Nauroth
wrote:
> I recommend that we update the compatibility guide with some text that
> explicitly addresses subclassing/interface inheritance stability for
> classes/interfaces annotated Stable. This is for our own benefit
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Karthik Kambatla
wrote:
> Inline.
>
> On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote:
>
>> I think there is more to it. The InterfaceStability javadoc states:
>> Incompatible changes must not be made to classes
I recommend that we update the compatibility guide with some text that
explicitly addresses subclassing/interface inheritance stability for
classes/interfaces annotated Stable. This is for our own benefit too. (I
often refer back to that doc when I'm coding a patch that might have a
chance of
On 31 May 2016, at 05:44, Karthik Kambatla
> wrote:
Inline.
On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Sangjin Lee
> wrote:
I think there is more to it. The InterfaceStability javadoc states:
Incompatible
Inline.
On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote:
> I think there is more to it. The InterfaceStability javadoc states:
> Incompatible changes must not be made to classes marked as stable.
>
> And in practice, I don't think the class annotation can be considered
I think there is more to it. The InterfaceStability javadoc states:
Incompatible changes must not be made to classes marked as stable.
And in practice, I don't think the class annotation can be considered a
simple sum of method annotations. There is a notion of class compatibility
distinct
Inline.
On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 3:51 AM, Steve Loughran
wrote:
>
> In SLIDER-1130, I discovered that some changes to some YARN classes had
> broken my test code —new abstract methods had been defined, which broke the
> subclasses I have to mock a YARN cluster. These are
In SLIDER-1130, I discovered that some changes to some YARN classes had broken
my test code —new abstract methods had been defined, which broke the subclasses
I have to mock a YARN cluster. These are invaluable classes, as, once
eventually the hadoop regressions had been worked around, they
13 matches
Mail list logo