mattcasters commented on pull request #15916: URL: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/15916#issuecomment-1044644209
@ibzib said "ValueProviders add a lot of unnecessary complexity to the configuration" ... and yet I worked under the assumption that it was best practice to do things like that given that all other Beam IOs use this. Personally I wouldn't use AutoValue for the exact same reason for example: it adds a lot of unnecessary complexity to what is essentially very simple code. So again I have to re-iterate that the rules for writing this code keep shifting under my feet and that there are no clear acceptance criteria. We're not debating whether or not the code works or not. We're not debating functionality, performance or anything like that. All these discussions for the past 4 months have resolved around code formatting and chasing hypothetical scenarios which a developer might engage in in a "monkey on a keyboard" scenario. I think that in the end this all comes down to there being no valid examples of a "properly written" Beam IO connector available. Is it our intention to make Neo4jIO an example and if so what else do we need in terms of documentation to capture all the comments and feedback provided in this PR? It just feels like this is the wrong place to let this hang around. https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/15916#discussion_r809459821 I'm really sorry, but leave what exactly as a TODO? Again I have no idea what this comment refers to. Thanks! -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
