Nice! That is *way* more than the PR I was looking for. I just meant that you could update the website/ directory. It is fine to keep the runner in your own repository if you want.
But I think it is great if you want to contribute it to Apache Beam (hence donate it to the Apache Software Foundation). The benefits include: low-latency testing, free updates when someone does a refactor. Things to consider are: subject to ASF / Beam governance, PMC, commiters, subject to Beam's release cadence (and we might exclude from Beam releases for a little bit). Typically, we have kept runners on a branch until they are somewhat stable. I don't feel strongly about this for disjoint codebases that can easily be excluded from releases. We might want to suffix `-experimental` to the artifacts for some time. I commented on the PR about the necessary i.p. clearance steps. Kenn On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 3:59 AM jo...@hazelcast.com <jo...@hazelcast.com> wrote: > Hi Kenn. > > It took me a while to migrate our code to the Beam repo, but I finally > have been able to create the Pull Request you asked for, this is it: > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8410 > > Looking forward to your feedback! > > Best regards, > Jozsef > > On 2019/04/19 20:52:42, Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> wrote: > > The ValidatesRunner tests are the best source we have for knowing the > > capabilities of a runner. Are there instructions for running the tests? > > > > Assuming we can check it out, then just open a PR to the website with the > > current capabilities and caveats. Since it is a big deal and could use > lots > > of eyes, I would share the PR link on this thread. > > > > Kenn > > > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 11:53 AM Jozsef Bartok <jo...@hazelcast.com> > wrote: > > > > > Hi. We at Hazelcast Jet have been working for a while now to implement > a > > > Java Beam Runner (non-portable) based on Hazelcast Jet ( > > > https://jet.hazelcast.org/). The process is still ongoing ( > > > https://github.com/hazelcast/hazelcast-jet-beam-runner), but we are > > > aiming for a fully functional, reliable Runner which can proudly join > the > > > Capability Matrix. For that purpose I would like to ask what’s your > process > > > of validating runners? We are already running the @ValidatesRunner > tests > > > and the Nexmark test suite, but beyond that what other steps do we > need to > > > take to get our Runner to the level it needs to be at? > > > > > >
