Make spark3 as activation profile

[hddong]

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Make spark3 as activation profile

Why are the changes needed?

Idea can not resolved dependencies if there are no activation profile

Cannot resolve org.apache.spark:spark-core_${scala.binary.version}:${spark.version}

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No

How was this patch tested?

test locally

[kaijchen]

Actually we can manually set active profiles in IDEA like this,

So this change is not necessary, and the solution is limited to spark3 profile.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #39 (64eb319) into master (8256765) will increase coverage by 0.54%. The diff coverage is n/a.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master      #39      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     56.29%   56.83%   +0.54%     
- Complexity     1168     1204      +36     
============================================
  Files           152      152              
  Lines          8401     8401              
  Branches        813      813              
============================================
+ Hits           4729     4775      +46     
+ Misses         3408     3368      -40     
+ Partials        264      258       -6     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...a/org/apache/uniffle/common/RemoteStorageInfo.java	94.44% <0.00%> (+31.48%)	:arrow_up:
.../java/org/apache/uniffle/common/BufferSegment.java	100.00% <0.00%> (+44.00%)	:arrow_up:
...java/org/apache/uniffle/common/PartitionRange.java	100.00% <0.00%> (+100.00%)	:arrow_up:

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov. Last update 8256765...64eb319. Read the comment docs.

[pan3793]

I'm neutral for activeByDefault, but recommend to unify the profile style, e.g.

spark-2.3
spark-2.4
spark-3.0
spark-3.1
spark-3.2

[kaijchen]

I'm neutral for activeByDefault, but recommend to unify the profile style, e.g.

spark-2.3
spark-2.4
spark-3.0
spark-3.1
spark-3.2

Agreed.

[colinmjj]

yes, the profile name should have same style

[jerqi]

I'm neutral for activeByDefault, but recommend to unify the profile style, e.g.

spark-2.3
spark-2.4
spark-3.0
spark-3.1
spark-3.2

It's good to unify the style. But I want to have a default profile for Spark2 and Spark3, the default profile is the version which we mainly support. So we make the some profile names special. Could you give some suggestion to solve this problem?

[pan3793]

... the default profile is the version which we mainly support.

With the community growing, other versions of Spark may be adopted by users in large-scale production, how about pointing the version on the use case sharing page(something like Who is using Uniffle)?

[jerqi]

... the default profile is the version which we mainly support.

With the community growing, other versions of Spark may be adopted by users in large-scale production, how about pointing the version on the use case sharing page(something like Who is using Uniffle)?

Good idea.