I think we're all good here. :) On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Chris Riccomini <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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-e >>> ngine/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 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >
