I agree with Kyle. [3] sounds more accurate. On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 3:00 PM Kyle Weaver <[email protected]> wrote:
> I prefer [3]. > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 10:53 AM Ning Kang <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> Last week, I sent a design doc >> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aKK8TzSrl8WiG0K4v9xZEfLMCinuGqRlMOyb7xOhgy4/edit?usp=sharing> >> and proposals in this email thread >> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r76596394aa403a1d95f3bda915a327c3932c0da88a9136fd903dc1c8%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E> >> about >> creating a JupyterLab extension for Interactive Beam >> <https://github.com/KevinGG/beam/tree/master/sdks/python/apache_beam/runners/interactive#interactive-beam>. >> If you haven't had a chance to look at it and you're interested in >> Interactive Beam, please feel free to leave comments. >> >> Let's start a vote for the name of this extension to be used when >> published to NPM <https://www.npmjs.com/>. >> Here are some of the candidate names: >> [1] apache-beam-sidepanel >> [2] apache-beam-interactive-sidepanel >> [3] apache-beam-jupyterlab-sidepanel >> [4] <I don't like [1][2][3], my proposal is ${XXX}> >> >> >> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority >> approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Ning. >> >
