Hey Peter, Thanks, will have a look. I'm a bit tied up with the 1.8.2 release at the moment, so it might be a little longer than usual, but I'll get there. I did do a bunch of Google PRs on Friday, but I must have missed this one. Stay tuned. If you don't get enough response by Wednesday, please re-ping.
Cheers, Chris On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Peter Dolan <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Chris, > > We sent our first pull request out for review last week, let me know if > you or someone else has time to take a look at it - > https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2390. Definitely > appreciate quick feedback as this is our first PR and I'm sure we're making > some novice errors. > > Thanks, > Peter > > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 1:32 PM Chris Riccomini <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Awesome, feel free to ping for code reviews if you don't get them in a >> timely manner. >> >> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 2:46 PM, Peter Dolan <[email protected] >> > >> wrote: >> >> > Just created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1273, >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1272, and >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1271. We'll follow up >> with >> > pull requests in the coming weeks. >> > >> > On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 10:44 AM Peter Dolan <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> Hi Bolke, >> >> >> >> Great! And yes, we will be able to maintain these operators after the >> >> contributions. We further would always insist on strong test coverage >> as >> >> well. >> >> >> >> I'll open some JIRA tickets to track their implementation. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Peter >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 6:05 AM Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Hi Peter, >> >>> >> >>> That sounds great! I think the main criteria for this is will you >> >>> maintain the code afterwards? The contrib section is slowly but >> steadily >> >>> growing and with operators/hooks we are particularly dependent on the >> >>> community as not all (or even none in some case) of the committers use >> >>> these themselves. >> >>> >> >>> In any case test coverage is required, but that is a given I think. >> >>> >> >>> Kind regards, >> >>> Bolke >> >>> >> >>> > On 31 May 2017, at 21:10, Peter Dolan <[email protected] >> > >> >>> wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> > Hello developers, >> >>> > >> >>> > I work with Google Cloud ML, and my team and I are interested in >> >>> contributing a set of Operators to support working with the Cloud ML >> >>> platform. The platform supports using the TensorFlow deep neural >> network >> >>> framework as a managed system. >> >>> > >> >>> > In particular, we would like to contribute >> >>> > * CloudMLTrainingOperator, which would launch and monitor a Cloud >> ML >> >>> Training Job (https://cloud.google.com/ml- >> engine/docs/how-tos/training- >> >>> jobs <https://cloud.google.com/ml-engine/docs/how-tos/training-jobs >> >), >> >>> > * CloudMLBatchPredictionOperator, which would launch and monitor a >> >>> Cloud ML Batch Prediction Job (https://cloud.google.com/ml- >> >>> engine/docs/how-tos/batch-predict <https://cloud.google.com/ml- >> >>> engine/docs/how-tos/batch-predict>), and >> >>> > * CloudMLVersionOperator, which can create, update, and delete >> >>> TensorFlow model versions (https://cloud.google.com/ml- >> >>> engine/docs/how-tos/managing-models-jobs < >> https://cloud.google.com/ml- >> >>> engine/docs/how-tos/managing-models-jobs>) >> >>> > >> >>> > I'm eager to hear if the Airflow project is open to these >> >>> contributions, and if any changes are suggested. We have working >> prototype >> >>> versions of all of them. >> >>> > >> >>> > Thanks in advance, >> >>> > Peter >> >>> >> >>> >> >
