Well it is not really a rule for a proposal but notice that there are
people in different time zones or people that for different reasons
cannot answer immediately, so a longer period could give them a chance
to voice their opinions.

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:23 PM, Robert Burke <[email protected]> wrote:
> That's good to know!
> I had heard of that specific rule, but I didn't realized it pertained to
> filing of a JIRA issue (when related to a proposal) as well.
> Thank you.
>
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 at 13:08 Ismaël Mejía <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> +1 Nice idea and proposal.
>>
>> This was not a vote thread but for the future it is a good idea to let
>> a bigger time window before reaching consensus.
>> Notice that a formal vote lets at least 72h for participants to voice
>> their opinion before concluding something.
>>
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 6:29 PM, Robert Burke <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > This seems like enough consensus to file the JIRA, so
>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-4115 has now been created.
>> >
>> > I'll get to work on the PRs shortly.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Robert Burke
>> >
>> > On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 at 03:52 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >> Agree
>> >> Regards
>> >> JB
>> >> Le 18 avr. 2018, à 14:51, Aljoscha Krettek <[email protected]> a
>> >> écrit:
>> >>>
>> >>> +1 this sounds super reasonable
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 17. Apr 2018, at 20:11, Kenneth Knowles <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> This seems like a valuable layer of indirection to establish. The
>> >>> mechanisms are pretty esoteric, but I trust Gophers to know the best
>> >>> way to
>> >>> do it. Commented just a smidgin on the doc.
>> >>>
>> >>> Kenn
>> >>>
>> >>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 4:57 PM Robert Burke <[email protected]>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Hi All!
>> >>>> While the Go SDK is still experimental, that doesn't mean it
>> >>>> shouldn't
>> >>>> be future proofed.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Go has the ability to specify custom import paths for a prefix of
>> >>>> packages. This has benefits of avoiding generic GitHub paths, and
>> >>>> avoids
>> >>>> breaking users in the event of infrastructure events such as moving
>> >>>> off of
>> >>>> GitHub, or even splitting the repo into per language components.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Currently users need to import paths like:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> import "github.com/apache/beam/sdks/go/pkg/beam/io/textio"
>> >>>>
>> >>>> to get at SDK packages. If we implement this proposal, they would
>> >>>> look
>> >>>> like:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> import "beam.apache.org/sdks/go/pkg/beam/io/textio"
>> >>>>
>> >>>> which are a bit shorter, a bit more stable, and a bit nicer, with the
>> >>>> benefits outlined above.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I wrote a doc with details which is at
>> >>>> https://s.apache.org/go-beam-vanity-import
>> >>>> (Thanks you Thomas for short linking it for me.)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The doc should answer most of your questions, but please let me know
>> >>>> if
>> >>>> you have others either here, or in a doc comment.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> If there's consensus to do so, it would be better it's done sooner
>> >>>> rather than after folks begin depending on it. We wouldn't want to
>> >>>> have
>> >>>> fragmented examples.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Robert Burke
>> >>>> (One of the Gopher Googlers who have been quietly lurking on the
>> >>>> list,
>> >>>> and submitting the occasional PR for the Go SDK. I look forward to
>> >>>> working
>> >>>> with you all!)
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >

Reply via email to