nastra commented on code in PR #8099:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/8099#discussion_r1277422279


##########
core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/actions/BaseSnapshotTable.java:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
+ * or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
+ * distributed with this work for additional information
+ * regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
+ * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
+ * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
+ * with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ *   http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
+ * software distributed under the License is distributed on an
+ * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
+ * KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
+ * specific language governing permissions and limitations
+ * under the License.
+ */
+package org.apache.iceberg.actions;
+
+import org.immutables.value.Value;
+
[email protected]
+// https://github.com/immutables/immutables/issues/291 does not apply here 
because we're not adding
+// any Immutable-specific class to the classpath
+@SuppressWarnings("ImmutablesStyle")
[email protected](typeImmutableEnclosing = "ImmutableSnapshotTable")
+public interface BaseSnapshotTable extends SnapshotTable {

Review Comment:
   it turns out adding `visibility = 
Value.Style.ImplementationVisibility.PUBLIC` will cause warnings for consuming 
clients (same issue as #291) and the suggested workaround isn't really feasible 
for us. 
   I've opened https://github.com/immutables/immutables/pull/1474 to fix this 
in Immutables and verified that consuming clients don't see the below warning 
with my proposed fix
   ```
   warning: unknown enum constant ImplementationVisibility.PUBLIC
     reason: class file for 
org.immutables.value.Value$Style$ImplementationVisibility not found
   ```
   
   Should we go ahead and merge this PR for now to unblock other work and I'll 
follow up and make those classes package-private but their generated classes 
public once the issue is fixed upstream?



-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to