Thanks for responding. I agree--it would be better to use Scala 2.11. I'm
in the process of creating a Beam POC with an existing platform and
upgrading everything in that platform to Scala 2.11 as a prerequisite is
out of scope.
It would be helpful to know if Beam in it's current state is backward
incompatible with Scala 2.10 for reasons other than the dependencies.
But if there is a way to make it work to enable a POC, I would appreciate
some pointers, as it doesn't seem to be as simple as changing the "*_2.11"
references in the poms.
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 5:34 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net>
> Hi Gary,
> Beam 2.3.0 and the Spark runner use Scala 2.11.
> I can help you to have a smooth transition by creating a local branch using
> Scala 2.10. However, I strongly advice to upgrade to 2.11 as some other
> part of
> Beam (other runners and IOs) use 2.11 already.
> On 02/22/2018 05:55 PM, Gary Dusbabek wrote:
> > Hi,
> > My apologies if this belongs on the dev list. If it does, let me know
> and I'll
> > shoot things over that way...
> > For the last day or so, I've been trying to create a Spark Runner that
> will work
> > on older deployments using Scala 2.10. I've taken a few approaches:
> > 1. selectively changing a few dependencies in beam-runners-spark.pom
> (and a few
> > other places in the parent)
> > 2. updating every dependency that references *_2.11 to be *_2.10
> > In the former case the sticking point in both cases is that there is a
> > incompatibility with jackson-module-scala_2.xx. In the latter case
> there is a
> > problem with SourceRDD.SourcePartitioning not [correctly] implementing
> > `equals(...)` from the parent trait.
> > Posts on the mailing list made me think that the move to Scala 2.11
> started only
> > last fall, so I figured it should be easy to make the switch back.
> > However, I have a feeling that it could be the case that I just don't
> > the Beam build system well enough to produce the right outcome (a custom
> > that can be used with older Scala).
> > Is there a correct or better way of achieving this?
> > Kind Regards,
> > Gary Dusbabek
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> Talend - http://www.talend.com