Re: [VOTE] Apache AGE Release 1.1.1 for PostgreSQL 12

+1 (again) > On 27 Jan 2023, at 7:14 am, John Gemignani wrote: > > Dear Apache Community, > > This is an official *RE-ISSUED* vote for the Apache AGE Release 1.1.1 for > PostgreSQL 12. > > To learn more about Apache AGE, please see http://age.apache.org/ > > Included and addressed in this

Re: [VOTE] Apache AGE 1.2.0 Release for PostgreSQL 11

+1 > On 27 Jan 2023, at 7:05 am, John Gemignani wrote: > > Dear Apache Community, > > This is an official vote for the Apache AGE 1.2.0 Release for PostgreSQL 11. > > To learn more about Apache AGE, please see http://age.apache.org/ > > Included and addressed in this release: > >Fix Python

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache AGE 1.1.1 Release for PostgreSQL 12

Once again I’m in favour of release early and often, especially while the project is new. As long as reasonable steps are taken to prevent any issues that would degrade the end-user experience (which I saw did happen as a result of last proposal). Let’s get added value into the hands of users

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache AGE 1.2.0 Release for PostgreSQL 11

I’m in favour of “release early and often”. There is enough new end-user value to warrant putting it out, especially while a viable set of base level features for wider general adoption is being put in place. I am not personally aware of a reason not to release. > On 14 Jan 2023, at 9:58 am,

Re: [VOTE] Apache AGE 1.1.0 for PG12 Release

+1 > On 5 Nov 2022, at 10:16 am, Eya Badal Abdisho wrote: > > +1 I checked the following. > > - PGP Signatures. > - SHA512 Checksums. > - LICENSE and NOTICE are fine. > > Thank you for the great release and work. > > Best regards, > > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 11:40 AM John Gemignani > wrote:

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache AGE for Postgres 12 - Version

I think it should be versioned after the main development/R version. Reasons: It is easy to tie back to what this version was based off, without looking up an index (which could be prone to error). If there is an as yet unfixed edge case bug affecting some portion of users on a particular

Re: [VOTE] Apache AGE 1.0.0 Release

+1 Releasing early and often helps the project to get traction. There is already a valuable feature set, that can benefit the community. There is a roadmap. It has been clearly communicated what to expect and what not to expect with this first cut. Onwards and upwards. > On Mar 16,

Re: [DISCUSS] Website Overhaul

Sounds great. Also visible links in and out of the site should help with Google site ranking as well as sharing. For example, by giving bloggers, social media users etc links that relate directly to their talking points. > On Feb 10, 2022, at 10:02 PM, Nicholas Sorrell wrote: > > All, > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Ambiguity in the MERGE Specification

n't be a way to tell these edges apart later on. >>> >>> I think it might be a better idea to just support non-directed edges. >>> >>> John >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 3:35 PM Jasper Blues >> >>> wrote: >>> >

Re: [DISCUSS] Ambiguity in the MERGE Specification

the same order: > Try to keep it arbitrary/random, else pick a direction. Option 1 of rejecting > the statement deviates from the spec and creates interoperability issues. > > ____ > From: Jasper Blues > Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 6:35

Re: [DISCUSS] Ambiguity in the MERGE Specification

Hi All, The quirk behind that CYPHER comes from Neo4j’s property graph model: All edges have a direction When direction is not relevant it can be ignored. This works will for read queries, for merge it is slightly quirky, however I believe the specification is reasonable: If we MERGE

Re: After openCypher

+1 Graph Algorithms! > On Jan 21, 2022, at 3:05 PM, Joe Fagan wrote: > > Congratulations on the great work todate. > > > Would be nice to add > > > Graph Algorithms eg > > Traversal and Pathfinding (ShortestPath, ShortestWeightedPath, Minimum > Weight SPanning Tree) > > Centrality

Re: After openCypher

I’m not sure if it is part of the official openCYPHER spec, however I would like to see support for: https://neo4j.com/blog/cypher-graphql-neo4j-3-1-preview/ Also is it possible to use AgensGraph drivers with AGE? The reason for

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache AGE Viewer (incubating) 1.0.0-rc1

[X] +1 Release this package as Apache AGE Viewer v1.0.0 [ ] 0 I won't get in the way [ ] -1 Do not release this package because … +1 Let’s show the community that progress is being made on all fronts. > On Jan 6, 2022, at 10:20 AM, Alex Kwak wrote: > > Dear Apache AGE Community, > > This is

Re: Apache AGE (Incubating) - Community Graduation Vote

ward to seeing this project continue to grow and prosper, hopefully as a fully-launched Apache project. Jasper Blues | Liberation Data <http://liberation-data.com/> Phone: +61 3 9028 7328 Skype: jasperblues