The LoadFunc refactoring was painful. I think what you are describing absolutely needs to happen, but may need to be a 2.0 thing.
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Julien Le Dem <[email protected]> wrote: > Before moving to 1.0, I think the public APIs should be refactored a bit. > (UDFs, ...: all the classes users extend or use) > Some of the Pig APIs have grown organically and would need changes. > examples: > - inconsistencies between EvalFunc and Accumulator > - Algebraic UDFs can not pass FuncSpec parameters to initial,intermed and > final > - UDFContext should be injected to the UDFs > - all classes/interfaces that user can depend on should be grouped in a > separate package (api vs implementation) > Of course this would be done in a soft manner (supporting both APIs for a > while) > > Now if there's a majority of people that think this can be done after 1.0 I > don't have a strong opinion about this. > > Julien > > On 3/8/11 8:09 AM, "Dmitriy Ryaboy" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Olga I would really rather take this vote when we are closer to knowing > what's in the release, and have had some experience running 0.9. This vote > seems premature. > > D > > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 1:57 AM, Mridul Muralidharan > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > As I elaborated before, given state of pig project, I would vote "-1" on > > next release being 1.0 > > Ofcourse, it is as mentioned, non binding :-) > > > > > > Regards, > > Mridul > > > > > > On Tuesday 08 March 2011 04:51 AM, Olga Natkovich wrote: > > > >> Hi guys, > >> > >> We had a lively discussion last week regarding what version number to > >> assign to the major release following Pig 0.9. The discussion can be > seen > >> here: http://tinyurl.com/4ng8upa. > >> > >> Based on the discussion, it seemed that most people were on-board with > >> making next release Pig 1.0 as long as we have done good job stabilizing > >> post Pig 0.9. > >> > >> I would like to call vote on calling the release Pig 1.0. I believe it > is > >> important to finalize the version number prior to starting the work on > the > >> release. I believe that this vote is part of Product Release Action and > as > >> such is subject to Lazy Majority vote: > http://pig.apache.org/bylaws.html. > >> > >> Please, complete the vote by the end of this Thursday, 3/10. Please, > note > >> that anybody is welcome to vote but only PMC votes are binding. > >> > >> Olga > >> > >> > > > >
