Github user sachingoel0101 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/966#issuecomment-130384903
Oh apologies. I only saw the first comment on the email thread. I guess
it's more or less settled. I'll leave it up to you guys to make a final
decision on this. :')
On Aug 12, 2015 10:59 PM, "Sachin Goel" <sachingoel0...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree with Stephan's argument that addition of context to I/O formats is
> a very marginal enhancement. He literally stole my words. :')
> However, from my perspective, when I first started using flink, Rich meant
> runtime context. The idea of open and close wasn't as nearly exciting as
> the runtime context.
> What if we changed back to the original name mentioned on jira and make it
> `ContextAwareInputFormat`? Would everyone be okay with that?
> On Aug 12, 2015 8:10 PM, "Stephan Ewen" <notificati...@github.com> wrote:
>
>> Functions also need to extend RichFunction to have access to open() and
>> close().
>> I think the two things a different enough that any strife for
>> "consistency" is actually pretty "random".
>> If your thoughts currently revolve around the RuntimeContext, it apprears
>> more consistent. If you thoughts are on the life cycle methods, it seems
>> inconsistent. Random.
>>
>> I think you should go ahead and just call them "Rich". It is just a name,
>> and what matters is that the JavaDocs describe what it actually means...
>>
>> â
>> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
>> <https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/966#issuecomment-130324909>.
>>
>
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
