[SPARK-49831] Provide empty RuntimeVersions object to ClusterSpec.runtimeVersions by default
#140
Conversation
This file contains 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
…runtimeVersions` by default
|
cc @viirya |
viirya
approved these changes
Sep 30, 2024
|
Thank you, @viirya . Merged to main. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Like the other fields of
ClusterSpec, this PR aims to provide at least emptyRuntimeVersionsobject toClusterSpec.runtimeVersionsfield by default.Why are the changes needed?
Although
ClusterSpec.runtimeVersionsfield is a required field, it'snullcurrently by default because this should be provided by the users. However, technically, we can createRuntimeVersionsobject with null fields when we don't know the values ofRuntimeVersionclass fields. By providing this intermediate object by default, we can write a test case more easily in other modules.Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.
How was this patch tested?
Pass the CIs with the updated test case.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No.