+1 (non googler) It sounds pragmatic, helps with transparency should issues arise and enables more people to fix.
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 8:15 PM Dan Halperin <dhalp...@apache.org> wrote: > From my perspective as a (non-Google) community member, huge +1. > > I don't see anything bad for the community about open sourcing more of the > probably-most-used runner. While the DirectRunner is probably still the > most referential implementation of Beam, can't hurt to see more working > code. Other runners or runner implementors can refer to this code if they > want, and ignore it if they don't. > > In terms of having more code and tests to support, well, that's par for > the course. Will this change make the things that need to be done to > support them more obvious? (E.g., "this PR is blocked because someone at > Google on Dataflow team has to fix something" vs "this PR is blocked > because the Apache Beam code in foo/bar/baz is failing, and anyone who can > see the code can fix it"). The latter seems like a clear win for the > community. > > (As long as the code donation is handled properly, but that's completely > orthogonal and I have no reason to think it wouldn't be.) > > Thanks, > Dan > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 11:06 AM Lukasz Cwik <lc...@google.com> wrote: > >> Yes, I'm specifically asking the community for opinions as to whether it >> should be accepted or not. >> >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 10:51 AM Raghu Angadi <rang...@google.com> wrote: >> >>> This is terrific! >>> >>> Is thread asking for opinions from the community about if it should be >>> accepted? Assuming Google side decision is made to contribute, big +1 from >>> me to include it next to other runners. >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 10:38 AM Lukasz Cwik <lc...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>> At Google we have been importing the Apache Beam code base and >>>> integrating it with the Google portion of the codebase that supports the >>>> Dataflow worker. This process is painful as we regularly are making >>>> breaking API changes to support libraries related to running portable >>>> pipelines (and sometimes in other places as well). This has made it >>>> sometimes difficult for PR changes to make changes without either breaking >>>> something for Google or waiting for a Googler to make the change internally >>>> (e.g. dependency updates). >>>> >>>> This code is very similar to the other integrations that exist for >>>> runners such as Flink/Spark/Apex/Samza. It is an adaption layer that sits >>>> on top of an execution engine. There is no super secret awesome stuff as >>>> this code was already publicly visible in the past when it was part of the >>>> Google Cloud Dataflow github repo[1]. >>>> >>>> Process wise the code will need to get approval from Google to be >>>> donated and for it to go through the code donation process but before we >>>> attempt to do that, I was wondering whether the community would object to >>>> adding this code to the master branch? >>>> >>>> The up side is that people can make breaking changes and fix it for all >>>> runners. It will also help Googlers contribute more to the portability >>>> story as it will remove the burden of doing the code import (wasted time) >>>> and it will allow people to develop in master (can have the whole project >>>> loaded in a single IDE). >>>> >>>> The downsides are that this will represent more code and unit tests to >>>> support. >>>> >>>> 1: >>>> https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/DataflowJavaSDK/tree/hotfix_v1.2/sdk/src/main/java/com/google/cloud/dataflow/sdk/runners/worker >>>> >>>
