I see no need for haste. These methods do not break anything and could be in use by community.
+1 to remove in 3.0 чт, 19 дек. 2019 г. в 11:09, Ivan Pavlukhin <vololo...@gmail.com>: > Guys, > > Why some of us are so critical regarding the subject? If I recall > correctly we decided to drop IGFS and Hadoop support before 2.8 > without much debate. And it was a feature users were interested in. I > never saw an interest to IgniteSchedule. My statistics is based on our > User mailing list. > > чт, 19 дек. 2019 г. в 11:00, Alexey Kuznetsov <akuznet...@apache.org>: > > > > I will vote "+1" for 3.0 > > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 10:57 AM Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > My Vote was for 3.0 > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 10:44 AM Valentin Kulichenko < > > > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Is this suggested for 3.0 or 2.8? > > > > > > > > I tend to agree with Alexey - API compatibility should be preserved > > > within > > > > a major version. I would oppose doing such a change in 2.x. > > > > > > > > If this is planned for 3.0, then it's a definite +1 from me. > > > > > > > > -Val > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 11:34 PM Alexey Kuznetsov < > akuznet...@apache.org > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > What if some users already using this module? > > > > > What they should do? Rewrite code? > > > > > I do not think it is a good idea. > > > > > > > > > > My "-1" here. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 8:53 AM Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > ignite-schedule does not look to be properly located or useful. > > > > > > My +1 here. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 8:35 AM Ivan Pavlukhin < > vololo...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ilya, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is a good initiative! Do we really need to keep > > > > > > > run/callLocall methods at all? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ср, 18 дек. 2019 г. в 17:59, Ilya Kasnacheev <il...@apache.org > >: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since 2.8 is branched, I want to initiate the discussion > about > > > > > removal > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > ignite-schedule module. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My plan as follows: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Remove ignite-schedule module entirely. > > > > > > > > Move runLocal and callLocal methods from IgniteScheduler to > > > > > > > IgniteCompute. > > > > > > > > Delete IgniteScheduler interface with its remaining > > > scheduleLocal() > > > > > > > methods. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rationale: Ignite is not a tool for local scheduling, > > > > IgniteScheduler > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > not provide any means of remote scheduling, and I don't think > > > > anybody > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > using that (especially since ignite-schedule is unpublished > LGPL > > > > > > module). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to hear opinions as well as positive and > negative > > > > votes > > > > > > > > towards this. If I won't see any activity, I will go forward > with > > > > > JIRA > > > > > > > > issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Previous discussion: > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5565 > > > > > > > > We tried to move it to Quartz but it changed semantics in > some > > > > ways. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > Ivan Pavlukhin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Alexey Kuznetsov > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Alexey Kuznetsov > > > > -- > Best regards, > Ivan Pavlukhin > -- Best regards, Alexei Scherbakov
