Merged
Conversation
db589d4 to
b608ce9
Compare
fdab925 to
529548a
Compare
b608ce9 to
ccbd4dc
Compare
Member
Author
|
Hmm, even in a draft pull request, the Core Team is forcibly assigned... Let me think. Please ignore the review request. |
Member
|
It is marked as 🌙 It seems that the meaning is the following.
|
Member
Author
|
Ah, I see, the 🌙 mark means like that... |
529548a to
022a0cf
Compare
Member
Author
|
Thanks! |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Embulk's "JSON"-type values have been represented by msgpack-java's
org.msgpack.value.(Immutable)Valuesince Embulk v0.7. The msgpack-java has set its roots deep inside Embulk, including its plugin SPI method signatures.It has brought a heavy dependency hell between Embulk and msgpack-java. We have hesitated even just upgrading
msgpack-corewhich can potentially cause a compatibility issue. As a result, a couple of plugins that usemsgpack-core(such asembulk-parser-msgpack) had to stay with oldermsgpack-core. Keeping it old is definitely bad.The Embulk v0.10 "development" series is a good chance to catch-up. Let's upgrade
msgpack-coreto 0.8.24, which is the latest v0.8 -- said to be still "compatible" expectedly.However, msgpack-java v0.9 added a support for a new MessagePack type. Compatibility issues may happen more likely. We do not go with msgpack-java v0.9.
Even though we stay with v0.8 now, it wouldn't continue for good. Instead of future "catch-ups" continued, we'll drop msgpack-java from Embulk in the long term.
Indeed, the Embulk core has never used
MessagePackernorMessageUnpackerfrommsgpack-core. Embulk has used onlyorg.msgpack.value.(Immutable)Valuejust as a JSON-like data container. It's nonsense!The long-term plan would be:
msgpack-coreto v0.8.24 in Embulk v0.10.42 in this pull request Upgrade msgpack-core to 0.8.24 #1459.org.embulk.spi.json.JsonValue) in v0.10.42 in another pull request Add org.embulk.spi.json.JsonValue to deprecate use of msgpack-core in embulk-api #1462.org.msgpack.value.Valueandorg.embulk.spi.json.JsonValue) for a long time -- even after Embulk v1.0.org.embulk.spi.time.Timestampandjava.time.Instant.org.embulk.spi.json.JsonValuethrough Embulk v0.11 - v1.0.msgpack-corewill be removed.We'll also write up an EEP for this.