I like the idea of per-module releases for Beam. I know Henning and others have thought about that space as well.
BTW, I'm a big fan of scio, and happy to help in any way possible if they are interested in turning "de facto" into "de jure" :D In such a world, Scio could be a very good first use case to drive the mechanisms to enable per-module releases. I think it allows us to scale better and sets a healthy path for special interest groups to naturally emerge and collaborate with their own scope in mind. On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 11:48 PM [email protected] < [email protected]> wrote: > > > On 2018/06/21 17:17:36, Reuven Lax <[email protected]> wrote: > > In that case things have changed since I talked to Neville about it last > > November. > > > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 10:16 AM Rafal Wojdyla <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Nope - it uses standard runners and is fully Beam compliant. > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Reuven Lax <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> My understanding was that under the covers it used the low-level > Dataflow > > >> service API to run the evaluations. > > >> > > >> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 10:10 AM Rafal Wojdyla <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi. > > >>> Reuven - sorry to hijack the thread - regarding REPL - what do you > mean > > >>> by it being very Dataflow specific? > > >>> > > >>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 12:04 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > [email protected]> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> As the code is not hosted at Apache as Beam, I would not consider > SCIO > > >>>> as the "official" Scala DSL. > > >>>> > > >>>> However, I agree that it's "de facto" Scala DSL for Beam ;) > > >>>> > > >>>> Just "wording" ;) > > >>>> > > >>>> Regards > > >>>> JB > > >>>> > > >>>> On 21/06/2018 18:00, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > > >>>> > I might go so far as to say Scio *is* the official Scala API for > Beam. > > >>>> > We point to it on our website, and have no plans to create > another. It > > >>>> > just happens to not be maintained and released by us. > > >>>> > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 7:37 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > [email protected]> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> Hi Alistair, > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> we discussed several times in the past with SCIO guys (especially > > >>>> >> Neville), but it seems there's no strong plan right now about a > > >>>> donation > > >>>> >> of SCIO in Beam. > > >>>> >> I think one of the concern is the release cycle, but I think it > makes > > >>>> >> sense to think about a release per module in Beam. It would allow > > >>>> use to > > >>>> >> release DSLs, IOs/extensions independently. But that's another > story > > >>>> ;) > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> Regards > > >>>> >> JB > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> On 21/06/2018 16:34, [email protected] wrote: > > >>>> >>> Hi, > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> Is there any plan to make scio an official scala API for beam? > If > > >>>> not, is there any plan to have a scala API? > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> Thanks, > > >>>> >>> Alistair > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> -- > > >>>> >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > >>>> >> [email protected] > > >>>> >> http://blog.nanthrax.net > > >>>> >> Talend - http://www.talend.com > > >>>> > > >>>> -- > > >>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > >>>> [email protected] > > >>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net > > >>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > > > Thanks for the responses everyone. I'm essentially looking for some > reassurance scio is still going to be supported in the long term. We'd like > to use it for a big project. > > It states in the scio repo readme that from v0.3.0 it depends on beam and > not on dataflow. > > Thanks, > Alistair >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
