+1

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:43 PM Robert Bradshaw <[email protected]>
wrote:

> +1
>
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 7:26 AM, Thomas Weise <[email protected]> wrote:
> > +1
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 3:03 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Agree
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> JB
> >>
> >> ⁣
> >>
> >> On Oct 25, 2016, 12:01, at 12:01, Aljoscha Krettek <[email protected]
> >
> >> wrote:
> >> >+1 This sounds quite straightforward.
> >> >
> >> >On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 at 01:36 Thomas Groh <[email protected]>
> >> >wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hey everyone,
> >> >>
> >> >> I've been working on a declaration of intent for how we want to use
> >> >> PipelineOptions and an API change to be consistent with that intent.
> >> >This
> >> >> is generally part of the move to the Runner API, specifically the
> >> >desire to
> >> >> be able to reuse Pipelines and the ability to choose runner at the
> >> >time of
> >> >> the call to run.
> >> >>
> >> >> The high-level summary is I wan to remove the
> >> >Pipeline.getPipelineOptions
> >> >> method.
> >> >>
> >> >> I believe this will be compatible with other in-flight proposals,
> >> >> especially Dynamic PipelineOptions, but would love to see what
> >> >everyone
> >> >> else thinks. The document is available at the link below.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Wr05cYdqnCfrLLqSk-
> >> -XmGMGgDwwNwWZaFbxLKvPqEQ/edit?usp=sharing
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >>
> >> >> Thomas
> >> >>
> >>
>

Reply via email to