Hello Pieter,
> A tad selfish I know,
> but https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-968 is what I am
> waiting for.
The things I listed are what I care about and what I plan to work on. If you
have things you care about, you can work on those. If you are unsure of a
development strategy, perhaps you can get others excited about your idea with a
[DISCUSS], work through pros/cons, get some buy in, etc. From there, develop
the idea, test it, document it, and ultimately provide a PR to get it merged
into a release line.
http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/3.1.1-SNAPSHOT/dev/developer/
SIDENOTE: A few people emailed me personally saying comments to the effect:
"Please deliver X, Y, Z feature." Note, if you want something done, do it. If
you don't know how to do it, learn it. If you don't know how to learn it, ask
and we can point you in the right direction. If you don't know how to ask -- I
know you are lying cause you asked me to deliver X, Y, Z. Gotcha!
Take care,
Marko.
http://markorodriguez.com
>
> Cheers
> Pieter
>
> On 30/01/2016 19:09, Marko Rodriguez wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> With TinkerPop 3.1.1 about to be put up for VOTE, we can start to turn our
>> attentions towards 3.1.2 and 3.2.0.
>>
>> I was thinking it would be good to have a planning session to organize JIRA
>> and discuss order of operations. However, JIRA planning sessions are a bit
>> boring as they are too "nitty gritty," so perhaps we can use this thread to
>> discuss what we (as individuals) would like to accomplish for 3.1.2 and
>> 3.2.0 in general. This way, we have more summaries of everyone's desires and
>> then the specifics can be shakin' out in JIRA. As such, here are my desires:
>>
>> TinkerPop 3.1.2
>> * Test a new shuffle optimization idea in SparkGraphComputer and if its
>> efficient, use it.
>> * Benchmark GiraphGraphComputer at scale and optimize it where need be.
>>
>> TinkerPop 3.2.0
>> * Gremlin DSLs -- e.g.
>> social.people().aged(36).who().know().person("daniel").who().worksFor().company("cisco")
>> * TraversalSource API redesign. g =
>> graph.traversal().withComputer(…).withStrategy(…).withBulk(…). The current
>> TraversalSourceBuilder model is horrible.
>> * OLTP/OLAP-mixed traversal -- e.g.
>> OLAP[g.V().out()]OLTP[limit(10)]OLAP[out().values("name").order()]OLTP[sample(1)]
>> * GraphComputer API additions for intelligent data access -- e.g.
>> g.V().count() does not need to grab all the edges of the graph!
>> * Bulking beyond Long -- support BigInteger, Complex numbers, Doubles,
>> etc.
>> * Redesign TraverserRequirements -- this is a rats nest that didn't
>> really work out as planned and its inefficient. I think I can make this a
>> lot more simple.
>> * ServerGraph/ServerStep/ServerStrategy -- like OLAP, but for
>> GremlinServer -- e.g. [GraphStep, VertexStep, ServerStep] (collaborate with
>> GremlinServer people on this).
>> * Scope.local & Scope.global rethinking -- count(local), dedup(local) …
>> too many -- this is not manageable! What about
>> g.V().groupCount().inside(order().limit(10)) instead of
>> g.V().groupCount().order(local).limit(local,10).
>> * Clean up HadoopGraph configurations -- Why do we have
>> gremlin.spark.graphInputRDD and gremlin.hadoop.graphInputFormat. We should
>> just have one configuration: gremlin.hadoop.graphInputClass.
>> * Publish a tutorial on the Gremlin VM and compiling other languages to
>> it. I would really like to have the gremlin-examples/ package that
>> Jason/Stephen were talking about.
>> * Optimize Gryo serialization and SparkGraphComputer's GryoSerializer.
>>
>> Those are the big ticket items that I would like to get handle for the next
>> versions of TinkerPop.
>>
>> What are your thoughts on these and what are your thoughts on what you plan
>> to accomplish in this next push?
>>
>> Take care,
>> Marko.
>>
>> http://markorodriguez.com
>>
>>
>
