Update bigtable docs to reflect latest client #454
Conversation
|
Author of one or more commits is not listed as a CLA signer, either individual or as a member of an organization. |
|
Hey there @igorbernstein2, thanks for the PR! Since you're from Google, I can add you to our CCLA; please give me a few minutes. |
|
While I'm working on the CCLA, @igorbernstein2, please follow these instructions to add a
|
janusgraph-bot
added
cla: yes
|
Please also update the |
docs/versions.txt
Outdated
| | 0.1.1 | 1.2.z, 2.0.z, 2.1.z | 0.98.z, 1.0.z, 1.1.z, 1.2.z | 0.9.z | 1.5.z | 5.2.z | 3.2.z | 1.6.z | 2.10.z | ||
| | 0.2.0 | 1.2.z, 2.0.z, 2.1.z | 0.98.z, 1.0.z, 1.1.z, 1.2.z | 0.9.z | 1.z*,2.z,5.z | 5.3-5.5.z, 6.2-6.6.z | 3.2.z | 1.6.z | 2.10.z | ||
| | 0.1.0 | 1.2.z, 2.0.z, 2.1.z | 0.98.z, 1.0.z, 1.1.z, 1.2.z | 0.9.7.1, 1.0.0-preZ | 1.5.z | 5.2.z | 3.2.z | 1.6.z | 2.10.z | ||
| | 0.1.1 | 1.2.z, 2.0.z, 2.1.z | 0.98.z, 1.0.z, 1.1.z, 1.2.z | 0.9.7.1, 1.0.0-preZ | 1.5.z | 5.2.z | 3.2.z | 1.6.z | 2.10.z |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is previously released 0.1.0 and 0.1.1 really compatible with 1.0.0-preZ Bigtable?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
bigtable-hbase simply implements the hbase 1.x api. The internal implementation should not affect consumers of the hbase api.
docs/versions.txt
Outdated
| | 0.1.0 | 1.2.z, 2.0.z, 2.1.z | 0.98.z, 1.0.z, 1.1.z, 1.2.z | 0.9.z | 1.5.z | 5.2.z | 3.2.z | 1.6.z | 2.10.z | ||
| | 0.1.1 | 1.2.z, 2.0.z, 2.1.z | 0.98.z, 1.0.z, 1.1.z, 1.2.z | 0.9.z | 1.5.z | 5.2.z | 3.2.z | 1.6.z | 2.10.z | ||
| | 0.2.0 | 1.2.z, 2.0.z, 2.1.z | 0.98.z, 1.0.z, 1.1.z, 1.2.z | 0.9.z | 1.z*,2.z,5.z | 5.3-5.5.z, 6.2-6.6.z | 3.2.z | 1.6.z | 2.10.z | ||
| | 0.1.0 | 1.2.z, 2.0.z, 2.1.z | 0.98.z, 1.0.z, 1.1.z, 1.2.z | 0.9.7.1, 1.0.0-preZ | 1.5.z | 5.2.z | 3.2.z | 1.6.z | 2.10.z |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We shouldn't change this retroactively to claim to not support the versions we supported earlier. Namely, JanusGraph previously shipped claiming to support Bigtable 0.9.5.z (and specified 0.9.z as the generic format); with the change to support literally "0.9.7.1", it implies that 0.9.5.z is/was no longer supported.
My recommendation is to change it back to 0.9.z, while adding 1.0.0-preZ as an additionally-supported version mask.
Thoughts?
|
updated |
|
@sjudeng – can you please take another look at the PR? |
|
Also, @igorbernstein2, if you plan to either squash this PR into a single commit and re-push, or for future PRs: for documentation-only changes such as this one, please include |
igorbernstein2
force-pushed
the
patch-1
branch
from
702a320
to
eb92256
Compare
This is to address the issues uncovered in this issue: JanusGraph#450 (comment) Please note, that there will be one more change before bigtable-hbase 1.0 is released that will remove the need for the netty-tcnative-boringssl-static dependency Signed-off-by: Igor Bernstein <igorbernstein@google.com>
igorbernstein2
force-pushed
the
patch-1
branch
from
eb92256
to
1f3c66b
Compare
|
squashed & rebased |
|
Thanks again, @igorbernstein2! |
Update Bigtable docs to reflect latest client [skip ci]
Update Bigtable docs to reflect latest client [skip ci]
This is to address the issues uncovered in this issue:
#450 (comment)
Please note, that there will be one more change before bigtable-hbase 1.0 is released that will remove the need for the netty-tcnative-boringssl-static dependency