+1 from me as well. Il giorno mer 6 feb 2019 alle ore 16:58 Yanbo Liang <yblia...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> +1 for the proposal > > > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:46 PM Mingjie Tang <tangr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> +1, this is a very very important feature. >> >> Mingjie >> >> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:42 AM Xiao Li <gatorsm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Change my vote from +1 to ++1 >>> >>> Xiangrui Meng <men...@gmail.com> 于2019年1月30日周三 上午6:20写道： >>> >>>> Correction: +0 vote doesn't mean "Don't really care". Thanks Ryan for >>>> the offline reminder! Below is the Apache official interpretation >>>> <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#expressing-votes-1-0-1-and-fractions> >>>> of fraction values: >>>> >>>> The in-between values are indicative of how strongly the voting >>>> individual feels. Here are some examples of fractional votes and ways in >>>> which they might be intended and interpreted: >>>> +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with this.' >>>> -0: 'I won't get in the way, but I'd rather we didn't do this.' >>>> -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational >>>> justification for my feelings.' >>>> ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's do it!' >>>> -0.9: 'I really don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the way >>>> if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.' >>>> +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the >>>> skills necessary to help out.' >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 12:31 AM Martin Junghanns >>>> <martin.jungha...@neotechnology.com.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Dongjoon, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for the hint! I updated the SPIP accordingly. >>>>> >>>>> I also changed the access permissions for the SPIP and design sketch >>>>> docs so that anyone can comment. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> >>>>> Martin >>>>> On 29.01.19 18:59, Dongjoon Hyun wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, Xiangrui Meng. >>>>> >>>>> +1 for the proposal. >>>>> >>>>> However, please update the following section for this vote. As we see, >>>>> it seems to be inaccurate because today is Jan. 29th. (Almost February). >>>>> (Since I cannot comment on the SPIP, I replied here.) >>>>> >>>>> Q7. How long will it take? >>>>> >>>>> - >>>>> >>>>> If accepted by the community by the end of December 2018, we >>>>> predict to be feature complete by mid-end March, allowing for QA during >>>>> April 2019, making the SPIP part of the next major Spark release (3.0, >>>>> ETA >>>>> May, 2019). >>>>> >>>>> Bests, >>>>> Dongjoon. >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 8:52 AM Xiao Li <gatorsm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1 >>>>>> >>>>>> Jules Damji <dmat...@comcast.net> 于2019年1月29日周二 上午8:14写道： >>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >>>>>>> (Heard their proposed tech-talk at Spark + A.I summit in London. >>>>>>> Well attended & well received.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> — >>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>>> Pardon the dumb thumb typos :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jan 29, 2019, at 7:30 AM, Denny Lee <denny.g....@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> yay - let's do it! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 6:28 AM Xiangrui Meng <men...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I want to call for a vote of SPARK-25994 >>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-25994>. It introduces >>>>>>>> a new DataFrame-based component to Spark, which supports property graph >>>>>>>> construction, Cypher queries, and graph algorithms. The proposal >>>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ljqVsAh2wxTZS8XqwDQgRT6i_mania3ffYSYpEgLx9k/edit> >>>>>>>> was made available on user@ >>>>>>>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/269cbffb04a0fbfe2ec298c3e95f01c05b47b5a72838004d27b74169@%3Cuser.spark.apache.org%3E> >>>>>>>> and dev@ >>>>>>>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c4c9c9d31caa4a9be3dd99444e597b43f7cd2823e456be9f108e8193@%3Cdev.spark.apache.org%3E> >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> collect input. You can also find a sketch design doc attached to >>>>>>>> SPARK-26028 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-26028>. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The vote will be up for the next 72 hours. Please reply with your >>>>>>>> vote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1: Yeah, let's go forward and implement the SPIP. >>>>>>>> +0: Don't really care. >>>>>>>> -1: I don't think this is a good idea because of the following >>>>>>>> technical reasons. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>>> Xiangrui >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
