[SPARK-47172][DOCS][FOLLOWUP] Fix spark.network.crypto.cipher since version field on security page #47353
Conversation
…sion field on security page
| @@ -214,7 +214,7 @@ The following table describes the different options available for configuring th | |||
| Cipher mode to use. Defaults "AES/CTR/NoPadding" for backward compatibility, which is not authenticated. | |||
| Recommended to use "AES/GCM/NoPadding", which is an authenticated encryption mode. | |||
| </td> | |||
| <td>4.0.0</td> | |||
| <td>4.0.0, 3.5.2, 3.4.4</td> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We will set this field to '3.4.4' as usual. It's okay when we fix it in one or two branches, but issues arise when we continue to backport more than 2 branches. The problem here is that it only tells us that 3.4.x (x>=4) and x.y.z (x>=4), but it can't tell us which version of 3.5 has it.
I suggest that we add the full list of fixed versions according to the corresponding JIRA ticket.
See the discussion here #47325 (comment)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We will set this field to '3.4.4' as usual. It's okay when we fix it in one or two branches, but issues arise when we continue to backport more than 2 branches. The problem here is that it only tells us that 3.4.x (x>=4) and x.y.z (x>=4), but it can't tell us which version of 3.5 has it.
I suggest that we add the full list of fixed versions according to the corresponding JIRA ticket.
See the discussion here #47325 (comment)
To @yaooqinn , actually, I disagreed with the suggestion.
|
If we are going to allow the contributors to upgrade all configurations in this style, I'm +1. In that case, we need to update our Apache Spark website too. |
|
Hi @dongjoon-hyun If you don't mind I will start updating versions of existing configurations and add a guideline in website for incremental updates after 3.5.2-rc1 |
…rsion field on security page ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Given that SPARK-47172 was an improvement but got merged into 3.4/3.5, we need to fix the since version to eliminate misunderstandings. ### Why are the changes needed? doc fix ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? no ### How was this patch tested? doc build ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? no Closes #47353 from yaooqinn/SPARK-47172. Authored-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org> (cherry picked from commit d8820a0) Signed-off-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org>
…rsion field on security page ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Given that SPARK-47172 was an improvement but got merged into 3.4/3.5, we need to fix the since version to eliminate misunderstandings. ### Why are the changes needed? doc fix ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? no ### How was this patch tested? doc build ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? no Closes #47353 from yaooqinn/SPARK-47172. Authored-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org> (cherry picked from commit d8820a0) Signed-off-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org>
|
Sure. Go ahead. I gave +1 to support this PR and the previous one. Initially, I was worried about consistency, but we can catch up them later, @yaooqinn . |
|
Thanks @dongjoon-hyun @mridulm, merged to master/3.5/3.4 |
yaooqinn
changed the title
|
SPARK-48904 is filed to track, we will see if we need to break the work into a couple of subtasks |
…rsion field on security page ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Given that SPARK-47172 was an improvement but got merged into 3.4/3.5, we need to fix the since version to eliminate misunderstandings. ### Why are the changes needed? doc fix ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? no ### How was this patch tested? doc build ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? no Closes apache#47353 from yaooqinn/SPARK-47172. Authored-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org>
…rsion field on security page ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Given that SPARK-47172 was an improvement but got merged into 3.4/3.5, we need to fix the since version to eliminate misunderstandings. ### Why are the changes needed? doc fix ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? no ### How was this patch tested? doc build ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? no Closes apache#47353 from yaooqinn/SPARK-47172. Authored-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org> (cherry picked from commit d8820a0) Signed-off-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org>
…rsion field on security page ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Given that SPARK-47172 was an improvement but got merged into 3.4/3.5, we need to fix the since version to eliminate misunderstandings. ### Why are the changes needed? doc fix ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? no ### How was this patch tested? doc build ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? no Closes apache#47353 from yaooqinn/SPARK-47172. Authored-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org>
…rsion field on security page ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Given that SPARK-47172 was an improvement but got merged into 3.4/3.5, we need to fix the since version to eliminate misunderstandings. ### Why are the changes needed? doc fix ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? no ### How was this patch tested? doc build ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? no Closes apache#47353 from yaooqinn/SPARK-47172. Authored-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org>
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Given that SPARK-47172 was an improvement but got merged into 3.4/3.5, we need to fix the since version to eliminate misunderstandings.
Why are the changes needed?
doc fix
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
no
How was this patch tested?
doc build
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
no