[ANNOUNCE] Apache Beam 2.38.0 Released

here: https://beam.apache.org/get-started/downloads/ This release includes bug fixes, features, and improvements detailed on the Beam blog: https://beam.apache.org/blog/beam-2.38.0/ Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release, and we hope you enjoy using Beam 2.38.0. -- Daniel Oliveira

Re: Lots of branches

Agreed, it would be a good idea to clean it out a bit. I went and deleted my own unnecessary branches. For anyone who needs it, here's a page listing all your branches in the repo: https://github.com/apache/beam/branches/yours On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 5:36 PM Ahmet Altay wrote: > Hello all, > >

Re: [Call for items] Beam October 2020 Newsletter

appropriate for it. Aside from those two questions, this newsletter looks really cool! I especially like the social media and online engagement sections. For someone like me who rarely pays attention to social media, it's nice to see a summary like that. Thanks, Daniel Oliveira On Mon, Oct 26, 2020

[ANNOUNCE] Beam 2.24.0 Released

here: https://beam.apache.org/get-started/downloads/ This release includes bug fixes, features, and improvements detailed on the Beam blog: https://beam.apache.org/blog/beam-2.24.0/ Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release, and we hope you enjoy using Beam 2.24.0. -- Daniel Oliveira

[RELEASE VOTE RESULT] Release 2.24.0, candidate #3

I'm happy to announce that we have approved the 2.24.0 release. There are 5 approving votes, 3 of which are binding: * Ahmet Altay * Robert Bradshaw * Thomas Weise Thanks everyone for your help to prepare the release. I'm going to finalize the release and send out the official release

Re: [PROPOSAL] Preparing for Beam 2.24.0 release

really appreciate it. While I can manage it, it would probably get done faster and with better quality by someone who's already familiar with these tests. On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 10:25 PM Daniel Oliveira wrote: > The first release candidate is out. It took longer than I expected thanks >

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.24.0, release candidate #3

a bit longer, this is the time to mention them. Thanks, Daniel Oliveira On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 4:59 PM Thomas Weise wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Rebased fork and run internal performance tests. > > While doing so, I run into the unit test issue below with the fn_runner > (Python direc

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.24.0, release candidate #3

By the way, most of the validation so far has covered Direct runner and Dataflow, but Flink and Spark still have little validation, so if anyone can help with those it will help speed up the release. On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 2:12 PM Daniel Oliveira wrote: > So I tracked the --temp_location is

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.24.0, release candidate #3

gt; resolved. >> >> On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 7:46 PM Daniel Oliveira >> wrote: >> >>> Good news: According to >>> https://ci-beam.apache.org/job/beam_PostRelease_Python_Candidate/188/consoleFull >>> the >>> Streaming Wordcount quicksta

[VOTE] Release 2.24.0, release candidate #3

Hi everyone, Please review and vote on the release candidate #3 for the version 2.24.0, as follows: [ ] +1, Approve the release [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments) The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes: * JIRA release notes [1],

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.24.0, release candidate #2

t; I just want to confirm that the issue I reported in RC1 is now fixed. >>> Thanks Daniel! >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 6:44 AM Daniel Oliveira >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > This RC was built with the expected version of OpenJDK, so it should >&g

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.24.0, release candidate #2

ready. On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 9:40 PM Daniel Oliveira wrote: > Hi everyone, > Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version 2.24.0, > as follows: > [ ] +1, Approve the release > [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments) > > &

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.24.0, release candidate #1

md.java:748) > > I checked the generated classes and they are v52 (Java 8 compatible) but > something seems to be wrong. Both the latest 2.24.0-SNAPSHOT version and > the > current 2.25.0-SNAPSHOT version pass the tests without issues. The issue > seems > to be only with

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.24.0, release candidate #1

ith Maven 3.6.3 and OpenJDK 11.0.7. > > If Java 11 was used to build the release artifacts, does this create any > backwards-compatibility challenges for Java 8 users? > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 8:59 PM Daniel Oliveira > wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> Please r

[VOTE] Release 2.24.0, release candidate #1

Hi everyone, Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 2.24.0, as follows: [ ] +1, Approve the release [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments) The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes: * JIRA release notes [1],

Re: [PROPOSAL] Preparing for Beam 2.24.0 release

ild-a-release-candidate>, I just finished step 7 last night after working around the last bug that was blocking me, and I'm continuing from there today, so hopefully I'll be able to have the release candidate ready before the week is up. Hope the update is helpful, Daniel Oliveira On Thu, Aug 27, 2020

Re: [PROPOSAL] Preparing for Beam 2.24.0 release

x version and send me the PR that will need to be cherry-picked. On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 6:59 PM Daniel Oliveira wrote: > I'd like to send out a last minute reminder to fill out CHANGES.md > <https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/CHANGES.md> with any major > changes that are going

Re: [PROPOSAL] Preparing for Beam 2.24.0 release

Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 8:27 PM Daniel Oliveira wrote: > Hi everyone, > > It seems like there's no objections, so I'm preparing to cut the release > on Wednesday. > > As a reminder, if you have any release-blocking issues, please have a JIRA > and set "Fix version" to 2.24.

Re: [PROPOSAL] Preparing for Beam 2.24.0 release

he issue is actually resolved, otherwise it makes it more difficult to differentiate release-blocking issues from non-blocking. Thanks, Daniel Oliveira On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 4:53 PM Rui Wang wrote: > Awesome! > > > -Rui > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 4:14 PM Ahmet Altay wrote: > >

Re: [PROPOSAL] Preparing for Beam 2.24.0 release

> You probably meant 2.24.0. Thanks, yes I did. Mark "Fix Version/s" as "2.24.0" everyone. :) On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 4:14 PM Valentyn Tymofieiev wrote: > +1, Thanks Daniel! > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 4:04 PM Daniel Oliveira > wrote: > >> Hi

[PROPOSAL] Preparing for Beam 2.24.0 release

-blocking fixes afterwards. So unresolved release blocking JIRA issues should have their "Fix Version/s" marked as "2.23.0". Any comments or objections? Thanks, Daniel Oliveira [1] https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=0p73sl034k80oob7seouanigd0%40group.calendar.google.com

Re: Go error when building containers

It looks like the cached version of a package is stale and causing build errors when building beam. Chances are just deleting that /.gogradle directory will cause everything to rebuild from a clean state, so I'd try that. I think it should be /sdks/go/.gogradle On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 4:56 PM

Re: Is this SO question showing a bug in Java Reshuffle? Can someone take a look?

have counts for that output? (I will say that seem to be an > extraordinarily high number of collisions.) > > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 3:34 PM Daniel Oliveira > wrote: > >> Hi dev list, >> >> While answering Stack Overflow questions I stumbled onto this: >> https://stac

Is this SO question showing a bug in Java Reshuffle? Can someone take a look?

context on it could help confirm. Thanks, Daniel Oliveira

Re: [VOTE + INPUT] Beam Mascot Designs, 2nd iteration - Deadline Friday, March 27

> > 1. Do you prefer red or black colored line art? Red. > 2. Do you have any additional feedback about the mascot's shape or > features? Love the new tail and new shadows. I like the wings better with color, but they still feel a bit dull to me. I feel they would be improved by having more

Updating releases on Github release page.

t;. I wanted to fix this, but I'm not sure if it's intentional, and I have no clue how to do so and am worried about messing something up. Anyone know how to fix it? And do we need to add that step to release instructions for the future? Thanks, Daniel Oliveira

Re: Go SplittableDoFn prototype and proposed changes

gt; It's especially exciting seeing this work on Flink and on the Python >> direct runner! >> >> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 5:36 PM Daniel Oliveira >> wrote: >> >>> Hey Beam devs, >>> >>> So several months ago I

Go SplittableDoFn prototype and proposed changes

terface->dynamic approach change. Thanks, Daniel Oliveira

Re: [VOTE] Beam's Mascot will be the Firefly (Lampyridae)

+1 (non-binding) On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 5:24 PM Kyle Weaver wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 3:10 AM Jan Lukavský wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> On 12/13/19 7:22 PM, Pablo Estrada wrote: >> >> +1 (binding) >> >> On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 8:47 AM Maximilian Michels >>

Re: [VOTE] Beam Mascot animal choice: vote for as many as you want

I'm also a bit late to the party. [ ] Beaver [ ] Hedgehog [X] Lemur [X] Owl [ ] Salmon [ ] Trout [ ] Robot dinosaur [X] Firefly [X] Cuttlefish [X] Dumbo Octopus [ ] Angler fish On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 8:37 AM Matthias Baetens wrote: > In case I'm not too late: > > [ ] Beaver > [ ] Hedgehog > [

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Daniel Oliveira

;>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 11:48 AM Valentyn Tymofieiev < >>>>>> valen...@google.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Congrats, Daniel! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 20

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Brian Hulette

Congratulations Brian! It's well deserved. On Fri, Nov 15, 2019, 9:37 AM Alexey Romanenko wrote: > Congratulations, Brian! > > On 15 Nov 2019, at 18:27, Rui Wang wrote: > > Congrats! > > > -Rui > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 8:16 AM Thomas Weise wrote: > >> Congratulations! >> >> >> On Fri, Nov

Re: Jenkins queue times steadily increasing for a few months now

mount of tests, do better work on > filtering out irrelevant tests, cancel irrelevant jobs (ie: cancel tests if > linter fails) and/or add option for cancelling irrelevant jobs. One more > big point can be effort on deflaking, but we seem to be decent in this area. > > Regards, >

Jenkins queue times steadily increasing for a few months now

I wanted to bring this up with the dev@ to ask: 1. Is this accurate? Can anyone provide insight into the metrics? Does anyone know how to double check my assumptions with more concrete metrics? 2. Does anyone have ideas on how to address this? Thanks, Daniel Oliveira

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Valentyn Tymofieiev

Congratulations Valentyn! On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 11:31 AM Boyuan Zhang wrote: > Congratulations! > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 10:44 AM Udi Meiri wrote: > >> Congrats! >> >> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 9:50 AM Yichi Zhang wrote: >> >>> Congrats Valentyn! >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 7:55 AM

Proposal for SDFs in the Go SDK

/14IwJYEUpar5FmiPNBFvERADiShZjsrsMpgtlntPVCX0/edit?usp=sharing Thanks, Daniel Oliveira

Re: apache-beam-jenkins-15 out of disk

Any updates to this issue today? It seems like this (or a similar bug) is still happening across many Pre and Postcommits. On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 12:33 AM Yifan Zou wrote: > I did the prune on beam15. The disk was free but all jobs fails with other > weird problems. Looks like docker prune

Re: [VOTE] Remove deprecated Java Reference Runner code from repository.

Pablo has merged the PR in and assigned a tag to the commit to make the ULR code easy to find in the future (java-ulr-removal <https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/java-ulr-removal>). The Java ULR is officially removed! On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 4:59 PM Daniel Oliveira wrote: > It's been

[VOTE] Remove deprecated Java Reference Runner code from repository.

Hello everyone, I'm calling for a vote on removing the deprecated Java Reference Runner code. The PR for the change has already been tested and reviewed: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8380 [ ] +1, Approve merging the removal PR in it's current state [ ] -1, Veto the removal PR (please

Re: Removing Java Reference Runner code

s that high of a barrier. > > As for a gradle command to run JVR tests on the Python ULR, I don't > think that's currently available, but it should be. > > > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 4:53 AM Daniel Oliveira > wrote: > > > > Hey Boyuan, > > > > I think

Re: Removing Java Reference Runner code

because >>>> it removes a lot of code that we do not really make use of. >>>> >>>> -Max >>>> >>>> On 26.04.19 02:58, Kenneth Knowles wrote: >>>> > Thanks for providing all this background on the PR. It is very easy >>>> t

Re: Removing Java Reference Runner code

le Java DirectRunner go, but I'm in favor of this change because >>> it removes a lot of code that we do not really make use of. >>> >>> -Max >>> >>> On 26.04.19 02:58, Kenneth Knowles wrote: >>> > Thanks for providing all this back

Re: Removing Java Reference Runner code

favor of this change because >> it removes a lot of code that we do not really make use of. >> >> -Max >> >> On 26.04.19 02:58, Kenneth Knowles wrote: >> > Thanks for providing all this background on the PR. It is very easy to >> > see where

Removing Java Reference Runner code

removing the code from the repo since it's been deprecated. If no one has any objections to trying to remove the code I'll have someone review the PR I wrote and start a vote to have it merged. Thanks, Daniel Oliveira

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New committer announcement: Boyuan Zhang

Congrats Boyuan! On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 10:20 AM Rui Wang wrote: > So well deserved! > > -Rui > > On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 10:12 AM Pablo Estrada wrote: > >> Well deserved : ) congrats Boyuan! >> >> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 10:08 AM Aizhamal Nurmamat kyzy < >> aizha...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>

Re: SNAPSHOTS have not been updated since february

, Mar 26, 2019 at 11:42 AM Boyuan Zhang wrote: > +Daniel Oliveira > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 9:57 AM Boyuan Zhang wrote: > >> Sorry for the typo. Ideally, the snapshot publish is *independent* from >> postrelease_snapshot. >> >> On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 9:5

Re: Python PVR Reference post-commit tests failing

The ULR used a bunch of code forked from the DirectRunner but I don't think it currently shares anything. And if it does share any code that I don't know about I expect that the dependency is one-way, i.e. removing the ULR shouldn't affect the DirectRunner. The only shared code I know of is

Re: New Contributor

Welcome to Beam Boris! On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 2:03 PM Mikhail Gryzykhin wrote: > Welcome to the community! > > --Mikhail > > Have feedback ? > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 1:53 PM Ruoyun Huang wrote: > >> Welcome Boris! >> >> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 1:34 PM Ahmet Altay

Re: Added a Jira beginner's guide to the wiki.

how all unresolved issues assigned to udim >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 9:22 PM Ahmet Altay wrote: >> >>> Thank you Daniel, this is great information. >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 11:47 AM Daniel Oliveira >>> wrote: >>> >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New committer announcement: Michael Luckey

Congrats Michael! On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 3:12 AM Maximilian Michels wrote: > Welcome, it's great to have you onboard Michael! > > On 28.02.19 11:46, Michael Luckey wrote: > > Thanks to all of you for the warm welcome. Really happy to be part of > > this great community! > > > > michel > > > >

Added a Jira beginner's guide to the wiki.

Hi everyone, In a recent thread in this list I mentioned that it might be nice to have a short guide for our Jira on the wiki since there were some aspects of Jira that I found a bit unintuitive or not discover-able when I was getting into the project. I went ahead and wrote one up and would

Re: Thoughts on a reference runner to invest in?

;>> > Interesting silence here. You've got it right that the reason we >>> > initially chose Java was because of the cross-runner sharing. The >>> > reference runner could be the first target runner for any new >>> > feature and then its wo

Re: Thoughts on a reference runner to invest in?

ntists/ > analytics. Being pragmatic, the FnApiRunner already has more feature work > than the Java so we should go with that. > > -Sam > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 10:07 AM Daniel Oliveira > wrote: > >> Hello Beam dev community, >> >> For those who don't

Re: Is it possible to gracefully close GrpcDataService? [was Re: [BEAM-6594] Flakey GrpcDataServiceTest.testMessageReceivedBySingleClientWhenThereAreMultipleClients - failing in precommit]

This is something I've run into while working on the reference runner and it's bugged me too. I've tried looking into what the issue was but usually hit dead ends. Your post is really helpful, I might use it to take another look when I have the time. On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 5:26 PM Alex Amato

Re: JIRA priorities explaination

Are there existing meanings for the priorities in Jira already? I wasn't able to find any info on either the Beam website or wiki about it, so I've just been prioritizing issues based on gut feeling. If not, I think having some well-defined priorities would be nice, at least for our test-failures,

Thoughts on a reference runner to invest in?

in it instead. My question to the community is: Which runner do you think would be more valuable to the dev community and Beam users? For those of you who are runner authors, do you have a preference for what language you'd like to see a reference implementation in? Thanks, Daniel Oliveira

Re: Enforce javadoc comments in public methods?

+1 I like this idea, especially with the line number requirement. The exact number of lines is debatable, but you could go as low as 10 lines and that would exclude any trivial setters and getters. Even better might be if it's possible to configure checkstyle to ignore this for getters and

Re: OOO

Thanks for all the work you've been doing on Beam, Luke! Hope you have some good bonding time and that it's not too hectic. On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 10:10 AM Kenneth Knowles wrote: > Congrats & have a super time! > > Kenn > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 10:09 AM Robert Burke wrote: > >> Have a

Re: ULR Tests on commit?

ularly. I'll try to keep it updated. On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 11:03 AM Scott Wegner wrote: > +Daniel Oliveira who has been working on the ULR. > > I believe this is in-progress. Dan, do you have a JIRA for tracking? > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 10:08 AM Robert Burke wrote: >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New committers, October 2018

Congratulations! On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 8:27 AM Thomas Weise wrote: > Congrats! > > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 7:24 AM Ismaël Mejía wrote: > >> Congratulations guys and welcome ! >> On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 4:12 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> wrote: >> > >> > Congrats and welcome aboard ! >> > >>

Re: [DISCUSS] Committer Guidelines / Hygene before merging PRs

As a non-committer I think some automated squashing of commits sounds best since it lightens the load of regular contributors, by not having to always remember to squash, and lightens the load of committers so it doesn't take as long to have your PR approved by one. But for now I think the second

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] New Beam chair: Kenneth Knowles

Congrats Kenn! Sounds like you deserve it! On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 10:20 AM Udi Meiri wrote: > Congrats! > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 10:09 AM Raghu Angadi wrote: > >> Congrats Kenn! >> >> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 12:54 PM Davor Bonaci wrote: >> >>> Hi everyone -- >>> It is with great pleasure

Re: jira search in chrome omnibox

This seems pretty useful. Thanks Udi! On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 3:54 PM Udi Meiri wrote: > In case you want to quickly look up JIRA tickets, e.g., typing 'j', space, > 'BEAM-4696'. > Search URL: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/QuickSearch.jspa?searchString=%s > >

Re: Process JobBundleFactory for portable runner

I just want to clarify that I understand this correctly since I'm not that familiar with the details behind all these execution environments yet. Is the proposal to create a new JobBundleFactory that instead of using Docker to create the environment that the new processes will execute in, this

Re: Removing documentation for old Beam versions

The older docs should be recorded in the commit history of the website repository, right? If they're not currently used in the website and they're in the commit history then I don't see a reason to save them. On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 1:51 PM Udi Meiri wrote: > Hi all, > I'm writing a PR for

Re: [DISCUSS] Automation for Java code formatting

+1 I'll throw in my support for auto-formatting, especially if the entire project is auto-formatted in advance. On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 10:53 AM Huygaa Batsaikhan wrote: > +1. Global auto-formatting is cool! > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 10:17 AM Kenneth Knowles wrote: > >> I just mean that

Re: The full list of proposals / prototype documents

+1 to web site page (not Google Doc). Definitely agree that a common entry point would be excellent. I don't like the idea of the Google Doc so much because it's not very good for having changes reviewed and keeping track of who added what, unlike Github. Adding an entry to the list in the

Proposed change to Portable Combine Spec - Adding a new URN

ations may come up, due to runner implementation details, where a CombineGroupedValues needs to be executed and the ParDo associated with it is not easily retrieved or doesn't exist. This new URN provides a backup option so that a full combine can be executed even then. Thank you, Daniel Oliveira

Re: Gradle Status [April 6]

ike > Dan spent considerable time trying to reproduce your issue. For the record, > I have had no issues running tests via Gradle in IntelliJ for the past few > weeks. > > Reuven > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:47 PM Daniel Oliveira <danolive...@google.com> > wrote: &

Re: Gradle Status [April 6]

anyone else with the knowledge > of why we nees that noise compared to idea native tooling/flow? > > Le 12 avr. 2018 20:16, "Daniel Oliveira" <danolive...@google.com> a > écrit : > >> Ah, I did not. Thanks Romain. >> >> I tried it again, restarting in between,

Re: Gradle Status [April 6]

...@gmail.com> wrote: > @Daniel: did you restart in between? Otherwise it does nothing. One > launches JunitCoreRunner from idea and the other a gradle command. > > Le 12 avr. 2018 19:24, "Daniel Oliveira" <danolive...@google.com> a > écrit : > >> I think it

Re: Gradle Status [April 6]

> it works ok when I run my tests with IDEA shortcuts. So, probably, we > should add this details on https://beam.apache.org/contribute/intellij/ > too. > What do you think? > > WBR, > Alexey > > On 11 Apr 2018, at 21:17, Daniel Oliveira <danolive...@go

Re: Gradle Status [April 6]

ully. >> For some reasons, tests, that use DirectRunner to run a pipeline, were >> failed. >> >> WBR, >> Alexey >> >> On 11 Apr 2018, at 19:01, Daniel Oliveira <danolive...@google.com> wrote: >> >> Hi everyone, I was the one who initially w

Re: Gradle Status [April 6]

Hi everyone, I was the one who initially wrote the PR with Idea instructions . I was using 2017.3 as well while writing it so all the instructions were tested on that version. I'll try testing the instructions on 2018 to see if I can reproduce the

Gradle questions on Eclipse and End to End tests

ts in Gradle? Thanks Daniel Oliveira

Re: [ANNOUCEMENT] New Foundation members!

Congrats! On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 2:05 AM Etienne Chauchot wrote: > Congrats > Le mardi 03 avril 2018 à 10:41 +0200, Kostas Kloudas a écrit : > > Congratulations to everyone! > > On Apr 2, 2018, at 9:14 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > > Congratulations! > >

Re: Design specs for portable Combine

nes are implemented as Pre-Combine -> GroupByKey -> Merge Accumulators -> Extract Output. - Side inputs are not described in the model as they can rarely be lifted. Combines with side inputs are modeled as GroupByKey -> ParDo. On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 10:19 AM Daniel Oliveira <dano

Design specs for portable Combine

f96unbqx8>. Please let me know if you have objections to that idea.* *Thank you,* *Daniel Oliveira*

Re: Dataflow runner examples build fail

+1 On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 10:07 AM, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > +1 > > On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 9:33 AM, Henning Rohde wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 1:32 AM, Ted Yu wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> Original message

Re: Possibility of requiring Java 8 compiler for building Java 7 sources?

>> > way: would a Java8 migration be in the scope of your work in general? > >> > > >> > However, until we say that Beam requires Java8, what would be the > >> > implications of using a version of AutoValue that can only be compiled > >> with >

Possibility of requiring Java 8 compiler for building Java 7 sources?

So I've been working on JDK 9 support for Beam, and I have a bug in AutoValue that can be fixed by updating our AutoValue dependency to the latest. The problem is that AutoValue from 1.5+ seems to be banned for Beam due to requiring Java 8 compilers. However, it should still be possible to compile

New contributor

Hi everyone, My name's Daniel Oliveira. I work at Google and I'd like to start contributing to this project so I wanted to introduce myself. I've already read through the contribution guide and I'm excited to start making contributions soon! Thank you, Daniel Oliveira