+1 from me to deprecate in 4.x and remove in 5.0.
> On Mar 9, 2023, at 12:01 PM, J. D. Jordan <jeremiah.jor...@gmail.com> wrote: > > +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 | >>>>>>> +---------------------------------------------------------------+ >>>>>>>
