Big +1 (non-googler). >From Samza Runner's perspective, we are very happy to see dataflow worker code so we can learn and compete :).
Thanks, Xinyu On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 11:34 AM Suneel Marthi <suneel.mar...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 (non-googler) > > This is a great 👍 move > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Sep 13, 2018, at 2:25 PM, Tim Robertson <timrobertson...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > +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 >>>>> >>>>
