Marko informed me late yesterday that he will be leaving what internet he has in a few days (and won't have any for several weeks after) so he intends to publish this document tomorrow morning for announcement on friday. Here's a few thoughts of my own to share as I reflect on what I'm reading:
1. This reads as it should, more overly broad direction than implementation - meaning, it doesn't spend any real time saying "how" any of this will work. There will be lots of further discussion on this list to determine that when the time comes. 2. I think this document helps shape our "future" document[1] which I hope we can make nicer with this vision as guidance. Hopefully, more "how" ideas will start to show up there. 3. Nice to have a documented history of the project somewhere to reference. Interesting how these different versions have built upon one another over the years 4. I really don't like the solution for multi/metaproperties. I think the old tried/true property graph model from TP 1.x and 2.x is sufficient, but i won't start a big discussion on it now. 5. I wonder to what extent we can evolve TP3 with TP4 - I think our compatibility story is really really nice and should give users and graph providers a ton of confidence in our direction. [1] http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/dev/future/ On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 2:34 PM Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry, I hit send a little too soon I had something to add from Marko who > said something in response to my email suggesting that we include a note on > "compatibility" (which he did in the manner I described - i.e. bytecode > translation). He said that we shouldn't think of TP3 as "the old version" > and TP4 as "the new version". He's seeing it more as "two strains that > continue to evolve". I also don't see TP3 immediately going end-of-life > over TP4, but I think his way of saying it is nicer and embodies a harmony > that TP4 seems to be shaping around it. > > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 2:14 PM Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> A point of clarification regarding the document and its usage - it is a >> DRAFT and not meant for wide distribution. I'm trying to encourage feedback >> from those here who have active interest in the development of our project. >> So please keep access to yourself if you requested it. >> >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 1:12 PM Keith Lohnes <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hey Stephen, >>> I'd be interested in taking a look at the doc. >>> >>> -Keith >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 12:17 PM Divij Vaidya <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > I would like to review the document as well please. >>> > >>> > Regards >>> > Divij >>> > >>> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 9:10 AM Stephen Mallette <[email protected] >>> > >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > yes - reviews/comments are open to anyone interested. i will share it >>> > with >>> > > you - it's a PDF in google drive. >>> > > >>> > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 12:07 PM Josh Perryman <[email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> > > >>> > > > If comments are welcome from outside of the regular committers, I'd >>> > > enjoy a >>> > > > chance to see it as well. >>> > > > >>> > > > And thanks for all of the work that each of you does. Those of us >>> that >>> > > > consume the results of your efforts appreciate the care each of you >>> > takes >>> > > > in moving this technology forward. >>> > > > >>> > > > -Josh >>> > > > >>> > > > Josh Perryman >>> > > > >>> > > > Data Junkie, Big Graph Guy >>> > > > >>> > > > 713.569.6533 <(713)%20569-6533> / @JoshPerryman < >>> > https://twitter.com/JoshPerryman> / >>> > > LinkedIn >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 9:29 AM Jason Plurad <[email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > +1 I'd like to review it. Thanks, Stephen. >>> > > > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 4:03 AM Stephen Mallette < >>> > [email protected] >>> > > > >>> > > > > wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > We've had many discussion on this list about what TP4 will be. >>> > We've >>> > > > > > migrated a number of those ideas to the "future" scratchpad[1]. >>> > We've >>> > > > > even >>> > > > > > introduced a number of concepts to TP3 which will help form the >>> > basis >>> > > > for >>> > > > > > TP4, like with() for provider specific instructions and Jorge's >>> > neat >>> > > > new >>> > > > > > work on the binary serialization format[2] which looks really >>> > > > promising. >>> > > > > > There have been numerous blog posts that created a lot of the >>> > > thinking >>> > > > > for >>> > > > > > what TP4 should be about as well[3][4]. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Parallel to the TP4 design strategy is the position TinkerPop >>> takes >>> > > in >>> > > > > the >>> > > > > > graph community. We want that position clear for users so that >>> they >>> > > are >>> > > > > > aware of the benefits they gain by considering >>> TinkerPop-enabled >>> > > > systems. >>> > > > > > We want that position clear to graph providers, so that they >>> can >>> > feel >>> > > > > > confident that fully leveraging/supporting TinkerPop is in >>> their >>> > best >>> > > > > > interest and yields them the greatest flexibility/capability in >>> > > > building >>> > > > > > their offering. Finally, we want this position clear for >>> ourselves >>> > so >>> > > > > that >>> > > > > > we can use it to help guide TP4 decision making along those >>> lines. >>> > > > Months >>> > > > > > ago, I conveyed my thoughts on our positioning informally on >>> our >>> > > > mailing >>> > > > > > lists[5]. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > The problem here is that these thoughts and works are spread >>> > unevenly >>> > > > > > across a lot of different places. Marko recently set to work >>> with >>> > > > > > collaboration from me to help drag all of these things together >>> > into >>> > > a >>> > > > > > single coherent document. This document explains the history >>> of the >>> > > > > > TinkerPop project in relation to its lore (never previously >>> unified >>> > > or >>> > > > > > fully explained) and describes the vision for TP4 using that >>> > > background >>> > > > > > context. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > There are no timelines for TP4 at the moment save for perhaps a >>> > > > starting >>> > > > > > date in the middle of 2019 somewhere...hard to say when such >>> > > > development >>> > > > > > would end obviously and I wouldn't venture to guess. The >>> document >>> > > does >>> > > > > not >>> > > > > > yet address compatibility which I think should be rectified - >>> going >>> > > to >>> > > > > > suggest that to Marko today. I think forward/backward >>> compatibility >>> > > > > seems >>> > > > > > achievable given bytecode i.e. it's just translating TP3 >>> bytecode >>> > to >>> > > > TP4 >>> > > > > > bytecode (or the reverse). I'd like to keep compatibility >>> forefront >>> > > in >>> > > > > our >>> > > > > > minds to try to make adoption and transition as smooth as >>> possible. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > At this point, we would be interested in feedback that could be >>> > > > > > incorporated into the document from the community. The dev list >>> > > strips >>> > > > > > attachments and I don't really want to make this document >>> widely >>> > > > released >>> > > > > > yet (i.e. put it on the general internet) so if you are >>> interested >>> > in >>> > > > > > reviewing a copy, please just reply to this thread and I will >>> share >>> > > the >>> > > > > PDF >>> > > > > > with you. Please continue to discuss feedback here on this >>> thread >>> > > > though. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > [1] http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/dev/future/ >>> > > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1942 >>> > > > > > [3] >>> https://www.datastax.com/dev/blog/the-von-gremlin-architecture >>> > > > > > [4] >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>> https://www.datastax.com/dev/blog/a-gremlin-implementation-of-the-gremlin-traversal-machine >>> > > > > > [5] >>> > > > > >>> > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/gremlin-users/czzHhYsbEmg/htgJGF4iBAAJ >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > -- >>> > Divij Vaidya >>> > >>> >>
