"what do you think about limiting the matrix to Runners in the Beam code base"
+1 but perhaps we should having a table listing Runners under development like we do for IOs. As a concrete example we have MapReduce listed in the matrix [1], a page documenting it [2] stating it is in Beam 2.6.0 but unless I'm mistaken the code exists only on a branch [3] and hasn't been touched for a while. Thanks, Tim [1] https://beam.apache.org/documentation/runners/capability-matrix/ [2] https://beam.apache.org/documentation/runners/mapreduce/ [3] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/mr-runner On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 1:37 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Max, > > not sure I fully follow you there. You mean that we would have kind of > compability matrix on dedicated page of each runner ? > > Regards > JB > > On 21/09/2018 10:57, Maximilian Michels wrote: > > Hi Beamers, > > > > There have been occasions where people asked me about Runner XY and I > > had to find out that it only exists in the compatibility matrix, but not > > as part of our code base. More interestingly, I couldn't even find its > > code or documentation via my favorite search engine. > > > > This seems to be the case for multiple Runners in the matrix. > > > > The compatibility matrix will need an overhaul anyways with the > > portability changes, but what do you think about limiting the matrix to > > Runners in the Beam code base? > > > > Thanks, > > Max > > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > [email protected] > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com >
