Yes, will do. 2015-03-10 16:39 GMT+01:00 Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>:
> Very nice work. > The changes are probably somewhat easy to merge. Except for the version > properties in the parent pom, there should not be a bigger issue. > > Can you also add additional build profiles to travis for scala 2.11 ? > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Alexander Alexandrov < > alexander.s.alexand...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > We have is almost ready here: > > > > https://github.com/stratosphere/flink/commits/scala_2.11_rebased > > > > I wanted to open a PR today > > > > 2015-03-10 11:28 GMT+01:00 Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>: > > > > > Hey Alex, > > > > > > I don't know the exact status of the Scala 2.11 integration. But I > wanted > > > to point you to https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/454, which is > > > changing > > > a huge portion of our maven build infrastructure. > > > If you haven't started yet, it might make sense to base your > integration > > > onto that pull request. > > > > > > Otherwise, let me know if you have troubles rebasing your changes. > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Chiwan Park <chiwanp...@icloud.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 for Scala 2.11 > > > > > > > > Regards. > > > > Chiwan Park (Sent with iPhone) > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 3, 2015, at 2:43 AM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I'm +1 if this doesn't affect existing Scala 2.10 users. > > > > > > > > > > I would also suggest to add a scala 2.11 build to travis as well to > > > > ensure > > > > > everything is working with the different Hadoop/JVM versions. > > > > > It shouldn't be a big deal to offer scala_version x hadoop_version > > > builds > > > > > for newer releases. > > > > > You only need to add more builds here: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/tools/create_release_files.sh#L131 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Till Rohrmann < > trohrm...@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> +1 for Scala 2.11 > > > > >> > > > > >> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Alexander Alexandrov < > > > > >> alexander.s.alexand...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >>> Spark currently only provides pre-builds for 2.10 and requires > > custom > > > > >> build > > > > >>> for 2.11. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Not sure whether this is the best idea, but I can see the > benefits > > > > from a > > > > >>> project management point of view... > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Would you prefer to have a {scala_version} × {hadoop_version} > > > > integrated > > > > >> on > > > > >>> the website? > > > > >>> > > > > >>> 2015-03-02 16:57 GMT+01:00 Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org > >: > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> +1 I also like it. We just have to figure out how we can publish > > two > > > > >>>> sets of release artifacts. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 4:48 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > >>>>> Big +1 from my side! > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> Does it have to be a Maven profile, or does a maven property > > work? > > > > >>>> (Profile > > > > >>>>> may be needed for quasiquotes dependency?) > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Alexander Alexandrov < > > > > >>>>> alexander.s.alexand...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>>> Hi there, > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> since I'm relying on Scala 2.11.4 on a project I've been > working > > > > >> on, I > > > > >>>>>> created a branch which updates the Scala version used by Flink > > > from > > > > >>>> 2.10.4 > > > > >>>>>> to 2.11.4: > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> https://github.com/stratosphere/flink/commits/scala_2.11 > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> Everything seems to work fine and the PR contains minor > changes > > > > >>>> compared to > > > > >>>>>> Spark: > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-4466 > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> If you're interested, I can rewrite this as a Maven Profile > and > > > > >> open a > > > > >>>> PR > > > > >>>>>> so people can build Flink with 2.11 support. > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> I suggest to do this sooner rather than later in order to > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> * the number of code changes enforced by migration small and > > > > >>> tractable; > > > > >>>>>> * discourage the use of deprecated or 2.11-incompatible source > > > code > > > > >> in > > > > >>>>>> future commits; > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> Regards, > > > > >>>>>> A. > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
