+1 from me to deprecate in 4.x and remove in 5.0. -Jeremiah
> On Mar 9, 2023, at 11:53 AM, Brandon Williams <dri...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think if we reach consensus here that decides it. I too vote to > deprecate in 4.1.x. This means we would remove it in 5.0. > > Kind Regards, > Brandon > >> On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 11:32 AM Ekaterina Dimitrova >> <e.dimitr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Deprecation sounds good to me, but I am not completely sure in which version >> we can do it. If it is possible to add a deprecation warning in the 4.x >> series or at least 4.1.x - I vote for that. >> >>> On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 at 12:14, Jacek Lewandowski >>> <lewandowski.ja...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Is it possible to deprecate it in the 4.1.x patch release? :) >>> >>> >>> - - -- --- ----- -------- ------------- >>> Jacek Lewandowski >>> >>> >>> czw., 9 mar 2023 o 18:11 Brandon Williams <dri...@gmail.com> napisał(a): >>>> >>>> This is my feeling too, but I think we should accomplish this by >>>> deprecating it first. I don't expect anything will change after the >>>> deprecation period. >>>> >>>> Kind Regards, >>>> Brandon >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 11:09 AM Jacek Lewandowski >>>> <lewandowski.ja...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I vote for removing it entirely. >>>>> >>>>> thanks >>>>> - - -- --- ----- -------- ------------- >>>>> Jacek Lewandowski >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> czw., 9 mar 2023 o 18:07 Miklosovic, Stefan >>>>> <stefan.mikloso...@netapp.com> napisał(a): >>>>>> >>>>>> Derek, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have couple more points ... I do not think that extracting it to a >>>>>> separate repository is "win". That code is on Hadoop 1.0.3. We would be >>>>>> spending a lot of work on extracting it just to extract 10 years old >>>>>> code with occasional updates (in my humble opinion just to make it >>>>>> compilable again if the code around changes). What good is in that? We >>>>>> would have one more place to take care of ... Now we at least have it >>>>>> all in one place. >>>>>> >>>>>> I believe we have four options: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1) leave it there so it will be like this is for next years with >>>>>> questionable and diminishing usage >>>>>> 2) update it to Hadoop 3.3 (I wonder who is going to do that) >>>>>> 3) 2) and extract it to a separate repository but if we do 2) we can >>>>>> just leave it there >>>>>> 4) remove it >>>>>> >>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>> From: Derek Chen-Becker <de...@chen-becker.org> >>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2023 15:55 >>>>>> To: dev@cassandra.apache.org >>>>>> Subject: Re: Role of Hadoop code in Cassandra 5.0 >>>>>> >>>>>> NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click links >>>>>> or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content >>>>>> is safe. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I think the question isn't "Who ... is still using that?" but more "are >>>>>> we actually going to support it?" If we're on a version that old it >>>>>> would appear that we've basically abandoned it, although there do appear >>>>>> to have been refactoring (for other things) commits in the last couple >>>>>> of years. I would be in favor of removal from 5.0, but at the very >>>>>> least, could it be moved into a separate repo/package so that it's not >>>>>> pulling a relatively large dependency subtree from Hadoop into our main >>>>>> codebase? >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> >>>>>> Derek >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 6:44 AM Miklosovic, Stefan >>>>>> <stefan.mikloso...@netapp.com<mailto:stefan.mikloso...@netapp.com>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Hi list, >>>>>> >>>>>> I stumbled upon Hadoop package again. I think there was some discussion >>>>>> about the relevancy of Hadoop code some time ago but I would like to ask >>>>>> this again. >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you think Hadoop code (1) is still relevant in 5.0? Who in the >>>>>> industry is still using that? >>>>>> >>>>>> We might drop a lot of code and some Hadoop dependencies too (3) (even >>>>>> their scope is "provided"). The version of Hadoop we build upon is 1.0.3 >>>>>> which was released 10 years ago. This code does not have any tests nor >>>>>> documentation on the website. >>>>>> >>>>>> There seems to be issues like this (2) and it seems like the solution is >>>>>> to, basically, use Spark Cassandra connector instead which I would say >>>>>> is quite reasonable. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> >>>>>> (1) >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/cassandra/tree/trunk/src/java/org/apache/cassandra/hadoop >>>>>> (2) https://lists.apache.org/thread/jdy5hdc2l7l29h04dqol5ylroqos1y2p >>>>>> (3) >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/trunk/.build/parent-pom-template.xml#L507-L589 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> +---------------------------------------------------------------+ >>>>>> | Derek Chen-Becker | >>>>>> | GPG Key available at >>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://keybase.io/dchenbecker__;!!PbtH5S7Ebw!YbHPCIGqxJHtAbvxPSXFEvnZgLrmvIE2AQ3Aw3BAgvCksv9ALniyHYVvU42wxrAGSNybhgjhwoAeyss$ >>>>>> and | >>>>>> | >>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?search=derek*40chen-becker.org__;JQ!!PbtH5S7Ebw!YbHPCIGqxJHtAbvxPSXFEvnZgLrmvIE2AQ3Aw3BAgvCksv9ALniyHYVvU42wxrAGSNybhgjhfDqR0lc$ >>>>>> | >>>>>> | Fngrprnt: EB8A 6480 F0A3 C8EB C1E7 7F42 AFC5 AFEE 96E4 6ACC | >>>>>> +---------------------------------------------------------------+ >>>>>>
