Welcome Vilhem!
Gris Cuevas Zambrano
g...@google.com
Open Source Strategy
345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105
On 17 October 2017 at 13:54, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> Welcome!
>
> There are many contributor-oriented docs on the website - even if you've
> read
Welcome!
There are many contributor-oriented docs on the website - even if you've
read some of them, there are probably more :-)
And in case it didn't jump out, there's a label "starter" [1] that we try
to tag JIRAs with if they might be gentle intros to the code.
Kenn
+1 to the goal. I'm hugely in favor of not doing the same shading work
every time for dependencies we know we'll use.
This also means that if we end up pulling in transitive dependencies we
don't want in any particular module we can avoid having to adjust our
repackaging strategy for that module
So maybe what we should do now is deprecate Java 7 support but not drop it
yet. I believe this is also what Spark has done.
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
wrote:
> Agree, I would target this for Beam 3.0.0.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 10/17/2017 06:43 PM,
Should this be considered a backwards-incompatible change? If so, do we
need to wait until Beam 3.0.0 is released?
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 9:11 AM, Ismaël Mejía wrote:
> I am bringing the subject to the user mailing list to get some
> feedback because it makes sense anyway to
I am bringing the subject to the user mailing list to get some
feedback because it makes sense anyway to discuss this there. But I
also agree with Kenneth about the fact that runner authors must weight
in on this subject.
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Kenneth Knowles
+1 to having runner maintainers weigh in as proxies. Added a few in case
they haven't followed this thread.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:38 PM, Eugene Kirpichov <
kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> Agreed that polling Dataflow users makes sense, though I think they are
> very unlikely to have
be glad to go over the jira to make sure that we understand each other
chaim
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Let me take a quick look and create a Jira if required.
>
> Thanks for the idea !
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 10/17/2017 01:54 PM, Chaim
Let me take a quick look and create a Jira if required.
Thanks for the idea !
Regards
JB
On 10/17/2017 01:54 PM, Chaim Turkel wrote:
I am fine if you can show me how to do the Create.of() on the MongoDbIO.read().
It would be nice also to have the status also on the MongoDbIO.write.
again
what is the purpose of this phase?
chaim
I am fine if you can show me how to do the Create.of() on the MongoDbIO.read().
It would be nice also to have the status also on the MongoDbIO.write.
again this is the reactive streams pattern that there always is a
complete or error path
chaim
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Jean-Baptiste
Agreed that polling Dataflow users makes sense, though I think they are
very unlikely to have concerns, because unlike Spark/Flink users they
wouldn't have a "cluster" that they need to migrate to a new JVM: they'd
only need to recompile their pipelines with JDK 8.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:21
I think the Flink and Spark runner maintainers can weigh in here; given
that both of those systems are moving to Java 8, I doubt they will have
concerns. Same is true for the Dataflow runner - we should probably poll
Dataflow users to make sure this is not a problem for any of them.
On Mon, Oct
Reuven - do you mean e.g. a poll on the Flink mailing list asking whether
there are Flink users who use Beam with Java 7? Or just people who use
Flink with Java 7? (the latter question I'd assume was settled by the poll
about making Flink itself Java8-only?)
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:32 PM
14 matches
Mail list logo