One more data point -- from looking at the SBT build yesterday, it
seems like most plugin updates require SBT 1.x. And both they and SBT
1.x seem to need Scala 2.12. And the new zinc also does.
Now, the current SBT and zinc and plugins all appear to work OK with
2.12 now, but updating will pretty much have to wait until 2.11
support goes. (I don't think it's feasible to have two SBT builds.)
I actually haven't heard an argument for keeping 2.11, compared to the
overhead of maintaining it. Any substantive objections? Would it be
too forward to put out a WIP PR that removes it?
On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 7:28 PM Sean Owen <sro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I support dropping 2.11 support. My general logic is:
>
> - 2.11 is EOL, and is all the more EOL in the middle of next year when
> Spark 3 arrives
> - I haven't heard of a critical dependency that has no 2.12 counterpart
> - 2.11 users can stay on 2.4.x, which will be notionally supported
> through, say, end of 2019
> - Maintaining 2.11 vs 2.12 support is modestly difficult, in my
> experience resolving these differences across these two versions; it's
> a hassle as you need two git clones with different scala versions in
> the project tags
> - The project is already short on resources to support things as it is
> - Dropping things is generally necessary to add new things, to keep
> complexity reasonable -- like Scala 2.13 support
>
> Maintaining a separate PR builder for 2.11 isn't so bad
>
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 4:09 PM Marcelo Vanzin
> <van...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Now that the switch to 2.12 by default has been made, it might be good
> > to have a serious discussion about dropping 2.11 altogether. Many of
> > the main arguments have already been talked about. But I don't
> > remember anyone mentioning how easy it would be to break the 2.11
> > build now.
> >
> > For example, the following works fine in 2.12 but breaks in 2.11:
> >
> > java.util.Arrays.asList("hi").stream().forEach(println)
> >
> > We had a similar issue when we supported java 1.6 but the builds were
> > all on 1.7 by default. Every once in a while something would silently
> > break, because PR builds only check the default. And the jenkins
> > builds, which are less monitored, would stay broken for a while.
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
