Thank you for opening the pull request. It looks great so far. There came up one question while discussing Alex changes in the PR: To make this change really usable for our users, we need to provide our users with different poms for each artifact, containing either Scala 2.10 or 2.11. Its basically the same thing we did for Hadoop's dependencies. We would then end up with the versions: 0.9.0 and 0.9.0-hadoop1 and artifacts like "flink-core" and "flink-core_2.11". So each module will generate 4 artifacts to maven central.
Another option would be to keep everything as it is right now, then users would need to set the properties correctly when building their flink projects. On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:41 AM, Alexander Alexandrov < [email protected]> wrote: > The PR is here: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/477 > > Cheers! > > 2015-03-10 18:07 GMT+01:00 Alexander Alexandrov < > [email protected]>: > > > Yes, will do. > > > > 2015-03-10 16:39 GMT+01:00 Robert Metzger <[email protected]>: > > > >> 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 < > >> [email protected]> 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 <[email protected]>: > >> > > >> > > 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 <[email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > +1 for Scala 2.11 > >> > > > > >> > > > Regards. > >> > > > Chiwan Park (Sent with iPhone) > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Mar 3, 2015, at 2:43 AM, Robert Metzger <[email protected] > > > >> > > 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 < > >> [email protected]> > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> +1 for Scala 2.11 > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Alexander Alexandrov < > >> > > > >> [email protected]> 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 < > >> [email protected]>: > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>>> +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 < > [email protected] > >> > > >> > > > 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 < > >> > > > >>>>> [email protected]> 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. > >> > > > >>>>>> > >> > > > >>>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >
