+1 for your proposed solution, Seth! On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 3:05 PM Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks for continuing this discussion Seth. I like the mockup and I think > this is a good improvement. Modulo the completeness check, +1 for offering > links to 3rd party integrations. > > Cheers, > Till > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 6:04 PM Seth Wiesman <sjwies...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > This discussion is a follow up to the previous thread on dropping > > vendor-specific documentation[1]. > > > > The conversation ended unresolved on the question of what we should > provide > > on the Apache Flink docs. The consensus seemed to be moving towards > > offering a table with links to 3rd parties. After an offline conversation > > with Robert, I have drafted a mock-up of what that might look like[2]. > > Please note that I included a few vendors that I could think of off the > top > > of my head, the list in this picture is not complete but that is not the > > conversation we are having here. > > > > There are three competing goals that we are trying to achieve here. > > > > 1) Provide information to users that vendor support is available as it > can > > be important in growing adoption within enterprises > > 2) Be maintainable by the open-source Flink community > > 3) Remain neutral > > > > Please let me know what you think > > > > Seth > > > > [1] > > > > > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Drop-vendor-specific-deployment-documentation-td35457.html > > [2] > > > > > https://gist.githubusercontent.com/sjwiesman/bb90f0765148c15051bcc91092367851/raw/42c0a1e9240f1c5808a053f8ff5965828cca96d5/mockup.png > > >
